It's not that black and white. Each installation needs its own specification. You go for a mix of technology. It's not JUST wind - you can put in some PV panels, and a wind turbine, maybe even a water turbine, maybe a fuel cell. Some places have good wind, many don't. Most places in tropical/temperate zones have reasonable or good solar resources, and some don't. Some places have permanent running water, most don't. And you don't design an off-grid system without a backup generator - yes, they use fossil fuel, but my experience is that it's still cheaper to have all that - in my case, solar PV, batteries, and backup generator - than it is to connect to the mains. At last quote in 2009, it was going to cost ~AUD$30,000 to connect me to the mains - 600 metres up the road. PLUS tree-clearing costs to put the poles in. It's financially feasible for me to have such a system, and you shouldn't say it's not for other people until you've conducted an energy audit for the consumer, and quoted on a suitable system.

Maleny and ditto the weather. Haven't had many mosquitos this summer - fortunately. Lucky for me, about the hippie/organic culture around here - there are locally-made repellents consisting of ti-tree oil, lavender, and some other herbal essences, that work quite well keeping the little bastards at bay - works for other bothersome pests, too.

And the exploitation of resources is something humans have been doing since, well, forever. It's something that we do, and will continue to do. Ideas are a resource - a resource that should be shared and not "owned", but there's nothing wrong with you exploiting your own expression of an idea, be it selling your novel, or your software - or even selling your rights to exploitation of that product - it's the idiots who grant patents for "rounded corners" that need fixing. I haven't got a problem with you obtaining a patent and exploiting your innovative variation on an idea (your idea or someone else's), as long as it's innovative. I guess the problem here is that it's too easy to prove "rounded corners" are innovative and deserve a patent.

Doctor's offices/surgeries (and the nearby pharmacies) often have a proportion of sick people higher than, say, supermarkets, or cafes. I'd have thought walking into a doctor's waiting room constituted a higher-than-average risk.

Now that's definitely true. Every time I manage to terminate a bloodsucker - mosquito, leech, etc - I remind them that they've become losers and evolutionary dead-ends.
 
Makes me feel a little better, anyway. I hate leeches.

I feel your pain - try some ti-tree and lavender/rosemary-based repellants. Thursday Plantation offer some decent products.
 
Where are you, BTW? Bayside Redlands, or Nudgee? I live in Maleny.

And by ignoring the smell of DEET, the mosquito is more likely to get herself a blood meal, and is thus more likely to reproduce. Whar evolution?

Perhaps you could take the time to read the whole thread, particularly the comments where I say I've done just that.

Asymmetrical plug/socket design. It's not that difficult.

Yes, and how much are you willing to pay for your ticket/s?

I'd mod you up, but I've already commented, and I hate seeing that "undoing mods" bar of shame :-(

Murphy strikes again! No, I'm not being sarcastic -that's the origin of the phrase - a cock-up concerning connectors that weren't one-way only.

Ditto for video rendering - Premiere Pro can use CUDA cores to render most effects real-time. It makes a BIG difference to productivity not having to queue up your various colour corrections and special effects for rendering, make adjustments, lather, rinse, repeat.

It was 80 kmh, not 80 mph. Yes it's somewhat dangerous and not to be practised, as a rule. As a one-off exercise to test the efficacy of the emergency brake, it's not a bad thing.
 
The driver's situation was already potentially catastrophic - I suppose it's one of those situations where you're damned if you do - provoke a lock-up and spin at 125, and damned if you don't - keep going at 125 until the fuel runs out, and hope you don't collide, or "fail to negotiate" a corner, or anything else that might happen to an out-of-control vehicle travelling at 125. Assuming other choices weren't available, of course - switch off the ignition, flick it into neutral, etc. I think the driver was extraordinarily lucky he's not dead.

Dangerous? Perhaps. It was already a dangerous situation, and the car needed TO SLOW DOWN. Using an emergency brake is a valid option. Yanking hard on the brake might cause the rear wheels to lock, but applying it slowly and firmly will slow you down, hopefully (but not definitely) to a manageable speed. Have you thought about the way front wheel drive cars work? The front wheels "pull" the car along. The rear wheels are otherwise passive and applying the handbrake will tend to "drag" the car backwards - where's the physics that will "easily" cause a spin? One force in one direction (drive) working against another force (brakes) in the opposite direction. Unless one wheels locks up or the braking force is grossly unequal between the two rear wheels, what force from what vector causes a spin? "The "torque steer" phenomenon mostly shows up during a gear change. Anyway the driver's life was already in peril, what else would you advise?
 
The engine can not "easily" move a car from stopped with the handbrake on - it takes a lot work, and the dynamics are different from a case where the vehicle is already moving. As I mentioned elsewhere, if handbrakes aren't to be used in an emergency, why are they made of friction materials - pads or shoes - rubbing against a moving disc or drum?