For comparison, C64 was released at $595 in 1982 and later came down to $250 the next year https://americanhistory.si.edu... which are $1,988.85 and $809.64 in today's dollars.

"You can watch the process up close in this mesmerizing video from Surface Mount Process." has no video link. It's https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

If I understand the problem correctly, the charger is considered the "equipment", so there would need to be a GFCI between it and the panel (or as part of the panel breaker itself). Assuming the charger is hardwired to the building, does code allow it to have its own integral GFCI rather than somewhere in the homerun before it? Having GFCI in the locked basement is not specific to chargers, or to anything really...just a poor usability design, and that's not The Code's problem.

On the other hand, if the new code mandates tripping at a leakage level below what the code for the charger itself is allowed to leak, that sounds like a technical mistake.

What exactly does this ruling confirm is allowed (or what would have been forbidden if the ruling had gone the other way)? Not legal or vague terms like 'use a password for fair dealing', but actual specific lay-language actions.

Trick question! Their system is down, so you can't file using them even after paying for it.

One hang-up seems to be the licensing. "The DOE strongly supports new reactor types, and its Idaho National Laboratory is an international hub for research into civilian nuclear power. But the NRC, which is a separate agency, has been less welcoming of new technology." https://cen.acs.org/energy/nuc...

I do *not* want meta to `finger` me.

Yeah. Did *anyone* actually think they just throw the thing away or that radioactive material just disappears when it's no longer needed?

If the two ingredients are separately available, why can't a physician prescribe both of them at their appropriate dosesEven if it's off-label, it should still be valid to write a scrip for it. When I had a prescription for an alergy med written for a certain brand-name product, my insurance company wouldn't even cover it unless my doctor would allow them to swap in a generic equivalent. Or are they not available either OTC or by prescription, but only through less-formal channels?

No, I mean "under-nines" bracket based on https://www.theguardian.com/sp..., which then it seems like some editors morphed into "age nine".

The underlying actual fact is that this is the "under-nines" age-bracket.

The article implies that the content has already been checked against the cited refs before it becomes available to readers. But instead, the Wikipedia model relies on trusting that editors are faithfully writing what the ref says and then allowing readers who care to check it themselves.

I've usually heard that called the "Charmin Touch"

"removed all traces" from the internet? Good luck with that.

Will CAH keep its "A big black dick" card?