Except that's not an obvious issue. Multiple connection methods exist for mobile devices, including this rare never before heard of thing called "WiFi" (I know, silly name right? Won't ever catch on).

I've literally provisioned devices from scratch without network connection to getting network connections from devices themselves (it's how e-SIMs work). I've used apps (mainly Vodaphone, T-mobile is late to the party here) to activate and provision phones on new networks with new SIMs as well. Heck last time I went into a Digicel shop they actually simply asked me to download the app and used the local shopping centre wifi (not even their own in store one, cheap bastards) to provision the service on my phone.

Huh? I've never been to a telecom shop to pick out a phone. I've ordered from phone companies online. I've ordered from Samsung directly. I've walked into electronics shops and bought handsets there, but never ... from a cell provider's physical store. There's a myriad of ways to become a new customer. Hell the wife just switched away from T-Mobile 3 months ago, all without ever leaving the couch. Phone, tablet (free as part of the signup), and SIM cards arrived along with instructions. Actually I lied, she did get off the couch as she had to sign for the deliveries.

Man is your mind going to be blown when you discover wifi.

... you do know AT&T never actually bought T-Mobile right?

Also T-Mobile is on a downward spiral globally (hell they completely rebranded in attempt to distance themselves from ... themselves in some countries. AT&T was only ever interested in T-Mobile America.

Again that's what I was saying. Notice that Canada abolished capital punishment. They didn't simply legalise everything that lead to it. Also speaking of statistics, while an increase in punishment doesn't correlate to an decrease in crime, the reverse isn't true. They are not correlated, not negatively correlated. Canada's murder rate went down for reasons unrelated to the abolition of capital punishment (which itself doesn't affect murder in the slightest).

Now making murder legal on the other hand...

No I checked, Elon Musk is still here on Earth.

China is the country that lead the charts in reducing carbon intensity per kWh generated in 2025. In fact one of the few countries where carbon intensity per kWh increased last year was the good ol' USofA. China's green energy growth far exceeded their energy growth last year (as it has the past 4 years).

Educate yourself https://www.energyinst.org/sta...

Are you sure that you had cows and not a bunch of small goats or something? Because a dozen small goats would produce 30lbs a day of poop.
The GP is very much right. Depending on breed, size, and feed, and purpose a typical cow shits out 60-150lbs a day. Cows reared for beef are on the lower end. Cows reared for dairy are on the higher end. Even heifers can shit out about 50lbs of manure a day.

https://thedairylandinitiative...
https://www.eesi.org/papers/vi...
https://dairyone.com/services/...

False. There is a strong correlation between not committing an act when it's criminal vs when it isn't remotely considered in law. You're misreading the statistics which say that the *severity of punishment* is not correlated with not committing an act.

i.e. Plenty of reasonable people don't do things simply because it is illegal to do so. Likewise if someone decides to do it anyway, the level of punishment doesn't change their mind.

Another thought came to mind. Let's assume we have intentionally fired and targeted rockets, and choice is between the Moon and the Sun.

I would choose the Moon, for the reason of recycling. We can likely recover materials from those rockets later. Many of them highly valuable once remnants of meteors that hit our planet's surface run out and before we start asteroid mining/if we discover some significant obstacles to mining asteroids in the future.

Shoot it at the Sun, and it's gone for us. We cannot use it again.

IMHO it makes sense to do keep them at least hypothetically recoverable in the future at no cost to us. Moon is worthless. It's an old, dead rock in space with no atmosphere and no magnetosphere. It eats massive asteroid collisions regardless. Even six to seven digit rocket shots at it would change nothing relevant from our perspective. If anything, I'd try to concentrate the rockets falling on the Moon in hopes of making it more concentrated batch of resources to more easily recycle in the long term future.

This is Slashdot. Every story needs to have one AC yelling about how they are being repressed by ${story_topic_not_remotely_understood_by_poster}

Story implies they didn't aim at all, it just took itself out?

Am I reading it wrong, or is story lying? I will admit I didn't verify.

Honestly, a bit confused here. The problem with space debris is that they stay up there, requiring a lot of tracking resources so that new launches don't get hit by it.

If this one went into Moons gravity well and crashed there, that means it's not a problem any more. Trash has been taken out. That's a good thing, isn't it?

No it doesn't. Because people's front yard are the property of those said people.

It would be a better analogy to say that kind of thinking gets you a corporate windmill in the field or mountain near where you live. And guess what, that's precisely what we do, and we rightfully tell those people who say "but I consider that dirt to be sacred" to go fuck off.

I'd be more worried about hearing "Venus! Stop eating your own vomit. No. Not. Don't try and lick me now!. Wait come back. Stop trying to sniff that dog's bumhole!"

Have you somehow missed the past 1.5 years worth of articles talking about scientific exodus from the USA? The fun part is the statistics are just as relevant when you open an article from March last year as if you open an article from 1 week ago, when there was yet another record set for PhD / emigration from the USA.

Oh by the way only last month Trump proposed a rule change that would force federally funded science to go through a senior political appointee review process instead of a peer review process as part of publishing.

It's no understatement to say scientists are bailing on the USA in record number. It's already reflected directly in the statistics. Many people are looking for any work that the USA can't interfere with.