To pay a fitting tribute to the man, I'd drop the coin into a dish of acid, but then instead of saving it while there was plenty of time left, I'd leave it to be slowly eaten away while occasionally dropping in healing herbs and drops of organic fruit juices, and then only try to rescue it once it was far too late

The problem was that you were part of that chain of obligations to, and the guy above you could grab your wife, or in the case of James II of England (James VI of Scotland), he could grab you.

China's population decline, as standards of living increase, will largely take care of the problem. China, like every nation that is now on the other side of the economic growth-population growth curve, will have to figure out how to deal with the next half century. But nothing is going to make factories less automated, and between population decline and foreign tariffs, they are only going to push automation further to fill the gap.

Which will not prevent automation. Look at the history of technological advancement, from the Paleolithic to today. Each major innovation has disrupted labor in some form or another, sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse, in a proximal sense, but in the long run societies adapt. You cannot block innovation, and if you do, you simply surrender the field to the nation that is willing to throw out the status quo.

All North America can think about is building more pipelines. The oil obsession, in the face of climate change and economics, means we're just going to fall further and further behind. Sure, for a while tariffs will serve to keep EVs and economy cars out, but not even the United States can defy gravity forever, and when it all comes crashing back to Earth, North American automanufacturers, the heart of North America's industrial capacity, will be shattered.

Or the automakers could just ignore the dictates of the White House. But at this point, we're stuck in a tragedy of the commons, with strong encouragement from political leaders in the US and Canada, who lack either the wit or the courage to make the final break.

If anyone had been listening to what he was saying, they would have had no idea what he was saying? The grandiosity masked the complete deficit not merely of ideas, but even of reason and coherence? They elected a mean-spirited moron.

Is it April 1? Or is this another manufactured moral panic?

Xi is a lot of things, but a tinpot dictator he isn't. I despise everything the regime running China stands for, but if we're going to look at the PRC's ability to maintain itself and even expand itself economically and scientifically. Xi may die tomorrow, but the PRC isn't going anywhere. If progress is measured in research, have you paid attention to how much basic research is coming out of China these days, as compared to the West, which seems bound and determined to decimate academic capacity, or hand it over to a bunch monomaniac billionaires.

You made an unfair comparison and then declared victory. I mean sure, if I plug my MacBook into a $20000 battery backup UPS I can probably get a few weeks out of the fucking thing, but that's not really any kind of rational comparison at all. Out of the box, MacBooks having some of the best battery performance of any laptop. You're comparison was the equivalent of "Oh sure, your Mustang can go 200mph, but if I take my Honda Accord and weld a rocket engine to the back, I can beat the sound barrier!

I think actually charging him and putting him in prison would have been better. But the Biden administration, and Garland in particular, were cowards and were afraid of creating a civil war. While Trump behind bars may have been able to win an election, and his imprisonment may have caused some sort of general MAGA uprising, the US Government has literally crushed and burned to the ground entire states that were in rebellion, so this all comes down to Biden, Garland and the DOJ being cowards, and not meaningfully taken Trump to task, and leave it to states to try to pick up the slack while they dithered.

I'm so very confused. I thought NPR was the fakest of fake news, a left wing Pravda outfit deliberately spreading misinformation to hurt Donald Trump... and thus America.

It's almost as if MAGA is comprised of morons and liars, who literally said anything to get Trump back into office, and deflect from his, and their, lies.

So basically, if you sacrifice hardware capacity, you get more battery life, as opposed to the pretty damned phenomenal Apple battery life out of the box.

And you feel this is something to brag about...

As if that's different from any other "Sponsored Item" search results?

I really look forward to more widespread adoption of AI search in listings. I hate spending hours having to manually dig through listings to see if the product listed *actually* meets my needs or building up spreadsheets to compare feature sets. This should be automatable. We have the tech to do so now.

To get an SLS-equivalent payload to the lunar surface, it will take 8-16 Starship launches

You're extremely confused. SLS cannot land on the moon in the way that the (lunar variant) Starship can. It can only launch Orion to the moon. Orion is 8 meters tall and 5 meters in diameter. Starship is 52 meters tall and 9 meters in diameter. These are not the same thing.

SLS/Orion missions are expected to cost approximately $4,2B each. If you fully disposed of every Starship, the cost for 8-16 launches would be $720M-$1,44B. But of course the entire point is to not dispose of them; the goal is to get it down to where, like airplanes, most of the cost is propellant. The propellant for a single launch is $900k. Even if they don't get anywhere near propellant costs, you're still looking at orders of magnitude cheaper than a single SLS/Orion mission.

By far, most of SpaceX's launches are for Starlink, which is self-funded.
Nextmost is commercial launches. SpaceX does the lion's share of global commercial launches.
Government launches are a tiny piece of the pie. They don't "subsidize" anything, they're just yet another minor revenue stream.

The best you can say is that they charge more for government launches, but everyone charges more for government launches than commercial launches. You can argue over whether that's justified or not (launch providers have to do a lot of extra work for government launches - the DoD usually has a lot of special requirements, NASA usually demands extra safety precautions, government launches in general are more likely to want special trajectories, fully expended boosters, etc), but overall, the government is a bit player in terms of launch purchases.