I guess that is the story. At the time I heard about it, I only "parsed" the headlines
But still ridiculous, don't you think?
What is next, I practice Thai and write some notes in the curvy scribble, or worth I learn Myanmar - which actually has an indeed very strange script, inspired by moon phases - and get accused of doing black magic in an air plane.
And about that you are wrong.
Sorry
Not really complicated.
And get some common sense, if corrosion would be an issue, no one would talk about building them. Oooops.
I just googled it, a photographer got killed - sad!
Florida calling out insane corporate behavior in the name of profits was not on my bingo card for this week.
That said, suing one company over putting profit above safety seems a little small-scale. That's seems to be the priority of all businesses now, and anything ahead of profit tend to get blasted for it by Wall Street or "investors."
The NEO _IS_ built out of iPhone parts,
Unlikely. From where would they get the parts?
Everything from Apple is build on ARM SoC's.
The NEO most certainly has an Intel or similar processor.
Because my head phones have a 3.5 plug.
Stupid comment.
All my iPhones never lasted - with extremely sporadic usage - a day, or more than a day.
My old Android, with similar usage patterns, lasts nearly a week. My new Android sucks.
It even gets hot
Keep in mind: all my phones are in flight mode over night till the first time I need them
It does not provide any checks and balances.
As: it can not check anything.
Balance anything.
Do anything.
And, the citizens didn't put Trump/Vance in office... you can send thank you letters to the Electoral College.
The Electoral College is obliged to vote the way how the states won the election. There is nothing they can do about.
Child labour is a definition of what is a child. In South (East) Asia: schools are free. And Kids have mandatory school duty.
So, only dictatorships like Myanmar might have Child labour. How would that work in any other country? Oh, mother forgot to register the kid in a school? School forgot to inform the city, that a kid is not coming? City forgot to sent police to the mother?
There is a bus in the morning, full with kids, which does not go to school - but to a factory?
Sorry, there most certainly is child labour in African dictatorships, where kids are SLAVES. So call it slave work, that would fit better.
Fact is, your country is not doing any high tech anymore except a few niche companies.
I live mostly in SEA. Of course only Thailand and Laos
Solar panels etc. are build by robots. The labour cost of the people involved is absolutely not significant. Sure it hurts the bottom line, if you pay $100 million per year for labour, that would only be half or a quarter in another country
Ok, so no answer there. It being the oldest actually cuts against your argument, other nations looked at our system and decided not to use that system.
Our founding fathers were students of Ancient Greece and learned from their early experiments with democracy.
Not an answer.
Our system does what it was designed to do, force compromise. Extremism is minimized.
Popular vote for President doesn't change that. Again, we have just one election that has to operate this way. The Senate and Congress and all that still operates the same. This is just about President, one office, one person. One vote per citizen.
This is why I feel like the arguments against popular vote are all vibes and Republicans who want to maintain minority rule. Same as why they wont' support eliminating gerrymanders, they only care about power, not principles.
It's easy to eschew popular vote when you don't actually care about democracy after all!
And I would say that it sounds like "checks and balances" but really, what is it checking? What is it balancing? Judicial/Executive/Legislative, they all have areas of the government that they interface with, who does the electoral college balance with? States interests? This is the executive, states have their own legislative both in their states and in Congress.
As you said yourself the EC was a compromise and logistical solve, not a legal one. Also it's form today with winner-take-all is far from how the Founders imagines it in the Federalist, I would imagine Hamilton would not like the system and outcomes it delivers now.
I would have to hear how the peoples interests and states interests are not represented in a nationwide popular vote.
Third parties are suppressed in the USA due to the fact we use First-Past-The-Post voting which is going to naturally lead to just two parties. Right now actual candidates can participate in either party primary, its pretty loose all things considered, there's no "You have to be a Democrat for X years to run in the primary" type rule.
I wholeheartedly support moving to a ranked choice or approval voting or STAR voting system but that's a different fight altogether.
Moving to national popular vote for the President is a good first step even with the two party system.
There is a story about a math teacher in a flight in the USA, he was taking notes, mostly equations while flying. His neighbour was a lady who could not read a thing of what he wrote. But panicked he would be terrorist.
Seriously: he is writing in a paper booklet, that made him a terrorist
For some odd reason the crew emergency landed the flight.
I guess with some google fu you find the story
Well, there is still the likelihood that he named the thing long ago at home and simply forgot the name of the device when he put it into his bag.
Me from 2000: https://dougengelbart.org/coll...
"Powertech -- Twenty years to widespread fuel cells, PV, wind, microturbines, etc.
Source: My general reading in this area, like my previous post on energy issues.
The referenced energy post by me from 2000: https://dougengelbart.org/coll...
"The current land area used in the US related to fossil fuel mining, refining, storage, and distribution is roughly 1% of the US land area. So, it is not fair to say renewables would use a similarly large amount of area and disregard this amount of space used by conventional techniques. For example, the area under existing power lines in the US (for right of ways - a huge expanse) is sufficient to generate all electric power used in the US if it was covered with photovoltaics.
There are no easy answers, but remember the incredible number of people who use energy (all of us) and the large numbers of people who are already involved with the energy industry in some way. So, there are many people to implement solutions. Don't be too overwhelmed by large numbers and costs. If fossil fuel and nuclear solutions were fairly priced today in terms of external costs like tax subsidies, environmental damage, and military requirements, we would see an immediate switch to alternatives and more energy efficient technology.
For that reason, I am quite hopeful for our energy future -- especially if developing countries can be given advanced technology, rather than having them simply duplicate the current antiquated American fossil fuel infrastructure. Unfortunately, the politics and finances of development often entail developing nations being sold the technology that no one wants anymore in the developed world (like for example DDT or old nuclear reactor and dam designs).
We need to figure out ways to prevent that from happening with energy technology the same way it has happened in the past with other technologies.
Me from 2010: https://groups.google.com/g/op...
"As I've said before, if you look at the exponential growth of renewables, in twenty to thirty years we will be completely running off renewables. This [questionable "Net Energy Limits and the Fate of Industrial Society"] report is like a report in the 1980s saying there is no way that most people will own cell phones because only about a million people a year are buying cell phones and it would take seven thousand years for everyone to get a cell phone at that rate. But now half the Earth's population does have cell phones? What happened? Exponential growth."
Ray Kurzweil also predicted exponential solar growth back in 2000 or so.
So yeah, who would have thunk it?
I mean, it's not like there might have been financial incentives for industry groups to provide misleading predictions, right?
"Why Does the IEA Always Underestimate Solar Energy's Rapid Growth?"
https://247wallst.com/energy/2...
"Using data from the agency's World Economic Outlook (WEO) for 13 of the past 16 years, Hoekstra graphed the actual growth of solar PV installation (the thick black line on the following chart) against the IEA predictions from the WEO. The starting point for each year's new prediction moves higher and in some years sharply higher. Hoekstra notes that "every single time since the future of photovoltaics was first predicted in the IEA WEO in 2002, the WEO has assumed the sector would hardly grow or even contract, even though this runs contrary to the observed reality."
Because the IEA's WEO is a widely used source for policy makers around the world, consistently underestimating the growth of solar PV when the data say otherwise discourages investment in solar and can hold back even faster growth.
Hoekstra, in a blog post last June, offers some possible explanations for the IEA's low and inaccurate predictions:
A triangle which has an angle of 135 degrees is called an obscene triangle.
