"I don't know anything about fusion."
Clearly.

Actually, you don't even get a bag.

just do 30 bong rips every day.

"This wasn't like the Kryptos sculpture at the CIA building where the fourth code has stumped the world's cryptographers for the past 30 years."

Actually, I have found an elegant solution to Kryptos' fourth code, but it is too lengthy to fit into this comment box.

It is NOT 13.5 billion light years away.

Nobody knows exactly what they are. We can only describe what they are like when we consider them in a certain way.

Sadly, no. In fact, the goal posts are not only moving but accelerating away from us. This quote from the article:

'There's huge uncertainty about when fusion power will be ready for commercialisation. One estimate suggests maybe 20 years. Then fusion would need to scale up, which would mean a delay of perhaps another few decades.'

So, it's gone from 30 to 40 years in the future?

The telescope has two sets (for redundancy) of thrusters for maintaining orbit around L2, with the amount of propellant determining how long it can be expected to remain in stable orbit. The launching rocket (Arianne 5?) released Webb at about T-5 minutes at a speed of 9.90 km/s (about 6.1 mi/s) for a long coast up the gravity well to a relatively flat spot at L2. Webb is now traveling at a pokey 0.393 km/s (0.244 mi/s) and should basically coast to a near stop at L2.
If you watch the Where's Webb website constantly, you can watch it lose speed. It's very exciting.
NASA has said that the launch was so accurate that the propellant saved should extend the lifetime of Webb by several years.

Awe? Where do you get that? You do not speak for the OP. I just happened to read the summary and cited article, then provided information I had wondered about, as no-one had posted yet. I considered it relevant.
Further the acceleration is easily calculated and is very reasonable for what is envisioned.
Third, I assume it's likely that a) the pod was not subjected to max acceleration; b) the trial was not run the full length of the test track (500 m, not specified if strait or round, assume straight); and c) the acceleration (say .5 to 1 g max) could be maintained significantly farther with a longer track, which, of course, is best built/extended after testing, which, of course, is what this is.

0 to 100 to 0 (mph) in 500 meters.

36 of 41 posts so far made by ACs. What are you all so afraid of, you chickenshit turds?

You've misread the DOL chart.
2016 was the first year with fewer than 100,000 coal miners.
There were 8 fatalites in 2016, down from a high of over 3,000 in 1907.

moderating while not thoroughly baked.

[insert *anything* for 'moderating'.]

also from the bizjournals.com article comes this confusing sentence, which indicates NY state ranks in a tie (with NJ) for 4th in net outward migration.

In terms of percentages, New York ties with New Jersey at minus-0.9 percent in terms of net migration. It is closely followed by Connecticut, with minus-1 percent net migration, and Illinois and North Dakota tied for third with a minus-1.1 percent change in migration.

It is indeed another legislative stunt orchestrated by Chris/Mark (he uses both) Sevier. He's been doing it (and other nonsense) for years. Keep in mind that this is just a bill. It has no chance of passing either house and even if passed would be summarily vetoed by the (D) Governor. It's just another big "HEY, LOOK AT ME!!!"

See, e.g., https://jezebel.com/man-with-b...