Toner costs less, and never expires. I actually care more about the second half simply because each toner cartridge tends to last me a couple of years due to how little I typically print.

I remember the Google Nexus Q as well. Had one myself. I remember they ended up refunding everyone and sending pre-orders one free anyway because they killed it so quickly. So the fact that you were able to use it at all was a kindness from Google.

Well... most smart BEV owners start with each day at a 70-80% full charge unless they are using the relatively new Model Y battery chemistry because charging to 100% wears the batteries harder and faster. However, the rest of your point is valid in that most BEV owners start with what they probably consider "a full tank" every single day, and yes, it is pretty awesome.

That's not a bad idea. Especially if you create special lanes for the EVs so that the EVs are in effect paying a road tax that they are currently avoiding via the gas tax. And I say this as an avid EV owner.

I'll add that I only ever felt the range was sacrificed on the Leaf. My original S and my wife's 3 each get an estimated range of about 300 miles per charge (and a realistic one of about 250-275 depending on conditions). My current S is estimated at 400, and I haven't driven it far enough away from home to have to charge it outside a daily trip. I suspect it's probably realistically about 350 if I were to drive it at freeway speeds for hours on end.

My 2012 Nissan Leaf was about 4.2 miles per kW. My 2016 Tesla S was about 3.6, as is my 2022 Tesla S. And my wife's Tesla 3 is about 3.8.

I don't know what you consider "the best ones" vs "the big boys", but those are real stats from cars I have had over the years.

And car dealerships!

I agree with what you said but add a quote I heard back during the "3D TV" craze a few years ago: "People are willing to spend a lot to avoid putting things on their face."

Love your tongue-in-cheek response. My wife is an elementary school teacher in FL. Her and I are fully vaccinated, I still work from home, and she wore her mask regularly in the classroom. When Omicron hit in early January, she had multiple students out because they tested positive. We were talking about it one day and she realized, no student who regularly wore a mask in the classroom ended up being absent. It was only the ones who didn't wear them, or didn't regularly wear them who got sick.

As I like to say, "the plural of anecdote isn't data".

Questioning everything isn't the path to enlightenment, it's the path to idiocy. How do you know 2+2 is 4? You were taught it. But how do you KNOW it? Well, you can take 2 sticks, add 2 sticks, and say "now I have 4 sticks". But if you question everything, how do you know that you ever had 2 sticks on one side, and that adding both sides together is 4 sticks because maybe you were lied to about the definition of both 2 and 4. At some point you need to be able to trust those who came before. It's a simple fact of life.

If only this were true. Because if it were, benefits of it's use would have actually been found by science.

Gotta appreciate a list that is titled "9 old drugs that learned new tricks"... and stops at 7...

The difference is that the overall goal of Viagra was to treat blood flow issues. Originally blood flow issues in the heart. Then it turns out, it helped with a lower area's blood flow issues. Now it seems it may even be beneficial to the brain in certain cases.

Ivermectin is meant to treat parasites like lice and livestock worms. It's not shocking to find a drug meant to treat blood flow issues actually helps with blood flow issues in places we didn't expect. It would be shocking to find that a medication meant to treat blood flow issues suddenly also is an anti-biotic.

Maybe because immunosuppressants are, by their very definition, medication that suppresses one's immune system. So both logic, and science, would expect that people who are actively suppressing their immune system are more likely to have a worse response when confronted with a new disease. Where as Ivermectin is used to treat parasites like lice and worms in livestock. Neither logic nor science would assume it is of any value in treating a virus. A bunch of wingnuts believed it did (mostly as a way to pretend there was a "cure" to avoid wearing masks), and now a large study has show it to be as completely useless as we should have always believed it to be.