> It's possible to help create something and yet hate nature the creation.

Sure, but people who hate their creation tends to not claim credit for it.

For that matter, I find that people who can create don't tend to get hung-up on their old creations, be they good or bad - they're just busy creating new things. On the other hand, if someone can't create, and they were lucky to be involved in the creation of something big but lost control - they can spend a lifetime being bitter.

According to his wikipedia page, he was laid off and left Wikipedia one year after its creation in 2002, and since then, he's been either working on a competing project or attacking Wikipedia, or both. Yet he seems to refer to himself as "Wikipedia co-founder" in his book.

There seem to be a few assumptions built into to your argument:
1. There is only a marginal net reduction is NO2 from EVs + fossil fuel power plants compared to ICE cars.
2. All (or almost all?) power plants in California are fossil fuel power plants.
3. Fossil fuel power plants are located in heavily residential areas, so there are no gains to be made from shifting NO2 from residential cars to power plants.
4. You are more informed than these researchers.
5. The researchers are green-washing, acting in bad faith or otherwise biased.

Even if we leave aside your claims 1, 4 and 5, I can't see how 2 and 3 could be true in general. Claim 2 is especially easy to disprove, given that the study was done in California, which has significant renewable energy in the electricity grid.
https://www.theguardian.com/us...

"...which is looking less likely: https://wmo.int/news/media-cen..."

The last few sentences from the article you quoted:
----------
"What we should take from this is the reef – the world’s largest living structure – is currently still able to recover from repeated shocks. But these shocks are getting worse and arriving more often, and future recovery is not guaranteed.

This is the rollercoaster ride the reef faces at just 1.1C of warming. The pattern of disturbance and recovery is shifting – and not in the Reef’s favour."
----------

Even the Paris Agreement was for 1.5C and below 2C, which is looking

> but they gained enormous lobbying power in the US, having diligently obeyed orders like good corporate lapdogs.
> I'm sure they'll come out on the winning side

Hmm.... are you sure? I heard on the internet that dogs are always on the wrong side :D

Could you please share links to your info sources?

I am not knowledgeable about the issue of oil drilling in the US. From a quick read, it seems that you're right in that Obama did approve old drilling in 2015, but he then seems to have reversed that decision and mostly banned oil drilling in 2016.

This seems like the baby duck syndrome for UIs. Users 'imprint' in the first system they learn and then compare it with each new UI and reacts negatively if there are significant changes.

Technologies change, use cases change, standards change, so UIs must also change or be left behind.

I too find it annoying when the Firefox UI changes and I have to relearn my most used application by far. I have been using Firefox over many devices for a very long time and I would like to continue to depend on it into the future, so I will bear with UI changes. On occasion, I might even like the change - like when the address bar was moved to the bottom in FF mobile.

The reasoning seems to be to track intentional views. In that sense, I guess 2min does make sense. Given that Netflix is not ad-supported or pay-per-view, intentional views seems as relevant for them as any other. It would be good if they also published full episode views as well.

Here is the text for anyone too lazy to click the link above:
--
"Given that we now have titles with widely varying lengths--from short episodes (e.g. Special at around 15 minutes) to long films (e.g. The Highwaymen at 132 minutes), we believe that reporting households viewing a title based on 70% of a single episode of a series or of an entire film, which we have been doing, makes less sense. We are now reporting on households (accounts) that chose to watch a given title (Chose to watch and did watch for at least 2 minutes--long enough to indicate the choice was intentional--is the precise definition)."
--

I don't believe that is correct. From this Slate article

". Perhaps the most famous presidential pardon of all time occurred before any charges were filed. Gerald Ford’s pardon of Richard Nixon absolved the former president of “all offenses against the United States which he has committed or may have committed or taken part in” between the date of his inauguration in 1969 and his resignation in August 1974."

Could you please post a link? I googled and found this article.

According to that article, those were not certified poll watchers and this happened more than a month before polling day, so they weren't polling places yet.

Do you have more recent information?

The images in the article indicate that the phone seems to detect which side is facing up when in a horizontal position and only light up that side.

The real smarts would be when the phone whether the phone would be able to detect which side to light up when in a vertical position. This is conceivably doable using face detection and/or hand orientation detection, but it might be tricky to get it right.