They're still in denial about that. Had one just a couple days ago saying that the gas price increases are just the regular price increase in the spring.

There's a bit of subversion here though: Going by my uncle, social security disability has made it even easier: They automatically reject every application the first time.

I was just reading a story where a woman ended up in jail six months, extradited to North Dakota from Tennessee.
The only evidence it was her was an AI facial recognition match between her social media/driver's license and the video of the actual suspect.
It wasn't until the first court date that the public defender got her financial records showing she was in Tennessee when the crime actually happened.
Then they kicked a southern state person out into ND winter without proper clothing, not even bothering to get her a ride back home.

She lost her house and car due to non-payment because she couldn't pay bills while in jail.

Looking, she'll probably end up with a $2-3M settlement.

https://www.theguardian.com/us...

I actually do, it is just that you don't understand the analogy.
Basically, by forgiving the loans, it's the equivalent of the government refunding the money the person was supposed to pay back.
Keep in mind that people sometimes have to declare loan forgiveness as income.

> "Our vehicles are giant paperweights right now through no fault of ours," one wrote on Reddit.

No fault? None at all? That seems... counter-intuitive.

I get it that the technology failed spectacularly, and that this is a serious problem for which people need to be held to account, but my car is working just fine.

I hate all of this sales pressure BS - that the instant anyone hears your name you have to try to "convert" them to sales - and I literally run a webstore.

It's all so deeply anti-consumer, and I want no part in it.

I say take the cash and open a new company under different management and build more offshore wind turbines, now that you have a billion.

Double checking, the "at least double" and "slightly higher capacity factor" might be considered inaccurate.
Onshore vs offshore wind energy: types of wind energy, difference and cost
This site suggests a 43% price increase per MW, but capacity factor goes to 38% from 24%, a 58% increase.

So if we take $3.13M per MW divided by .24 = $13M per capacity factor adjusted continuous MW for onshore.
$4.49M per MW for offshore divided by .38 = $12M per MW adjusted.

Though NREL 2024 has levelized cost of energy for offshore fixed bottom wind turbines being almost 3 times the price as land based.

IRENA has on-shore at around $0.042 per kWh, and offshore around 0.062, around 50% more.

My thinking is thus that a mix of both might be good, as the more install areas we have, the more level the production is likely to be, reducing the need for storage. Plus, would depend on whether or not the power provider has good on-land areas for wind turbines, or good offshore areas. Texas has a lot of good spots on land, while states like New York, or the east coast in general, may not.

Double checking, the "at least double" and "slightly higher capacity factor" might be considered inaccurate enough to downmod.
Onshore vs offshore wind energy: types of wind energy, difference and cost
Suggests a 43% price increase per MW, but capacity factor goes to 38% from 24%, a 58% increase.

So if we take $3.13M per MW divided by .24 = $13M per capacity factor adjusted continuous MW for onshore.
$4.49M per MW for offshore divided by .38 = $12M per MW adjusted.

This makes offshore slightly cheaper.

Remember when the Supreme Court ruled Biden's idea to forgive or "refund" people's student loans was unconstitutional?

I think this should be ruled unconstitutional. It is congress that has the power of the purse, Trump shouldn't be able to pay anything for something like this without their approval.
If he does cause it to be paid, it should come out of his own personal finances.

you know, living is harmful to your life, every day is getting you closer to death. Eating many foods is harmful, drinking many things, breathing the air in many parts of the world and during different weather conditions. Having sex may be harmful, it can degrade your quality of life in the long term.

There are millions of harmful things, you will die and everyone else as well. I am not proposing for everyone to do everything, I am saying - if you enjoy it, don't allow people to dictate to you, do it.

you do understand we live only once, what's wrong with porn, gambling and drugs? Enjoy it if you want it.

is that a serious comment?

Firstly, I see you have this notion that martian rocks must all be igneous.

You're not talking about rock, you're talking about regolith.

Depending on where the regolith is sourced

Regolith is not "sourced", it's blown across the whole planet. It's not simply "whatever the underlying strata is made out of".

But, since we are playing 'name the ignorance' in this exchange, your attestation stat perchlorate is 0.5% liberatable oxygen says 'Say i'm ignorant of basic chemistry without saying i'm ignorant of basic chemistry, and am bad at reading too.' The 0.5% statistic comes from the publication at bottom, and is the proportion of the regolith that is perchlorates.

I am the one who mentioned that regolith is 0.5% perchlorates, not that "perchlorates are 0.5% oxygen". *facepalm*

"Saying we'll get oxygen from the 0,5-1% of a poison in martian regolith, rather than bulk ice or CO2, is..."

For God's sake, learn to fucking read.

Washing the regolith to remove the perchlorate is a requirement for *any* other use of that regolith

Which is why you shouldn't be celebrating its existence. It is a problematic contaminant, not a resource.

As you have rightly pointed out, the water ice on mars is more 'frozen mud'. Cleaning the melt is going to be a necessary first step to using it *regardless*. That means either vacuum distillation, thermal distillation, or reverse osmosis filtration. Again, NOT OPTIONAL. This is necessary equipment that you need to bring, regardless.

And this just to get water, the most basic of offworld resources. And all of that equipment (especially the mining hardware itself) requires maintenance and spare parts, which impose more dependencies. And the TRL for use on Mars is low regardless.

You've gone from talking up the ease of operating on Mars to talking it down, yet your self-righteousness hasn't shifted at all in the process.

RO filtration is the least energy intensive of these.

Except, it isn't. 0,5-1% perchlorates. RO typically removes 90-95% of perchlorates. So you're down to ~500ppm. Human safety levels** are in the low parts per billion. You're five orders of magnitude off. Yes, you can purify water that far - and the more perchlorates, the easier - but you're talking an over millionfold reduction. It is not at all trivial. You're talking first RO to get it down to levels where it won't hinder bacterial growth, then bioreactor bacterial remediation, then filtration, then RO, then ion exchange. This is not some little, simple system.

** Plants can tolerate much more perchlorates than humans, but they also bioaccumulate perchlorates of exposed to them, so you have to reduce the water to low ppb levels.

The end products are clean water and perchlorate contaminated mud, and clean mud, with contaminated water.

Viola! *eyeroll*

And your "plan" for dealing with waste perchlorate doesn't just magically produce pure O2 and NaCl in the real world. First off, molten sodium perchlorate, which is what it becomes before it decomposes, is an extremely corrosive oxidizer. Exactly what are you planning to make the furnace out of, platinum? Secondly, you never get perfect decomposition. Apart from residual perchlorates, you have residual sodium chlorate, which is also corrosive, and is a literal herbicide. And your gas stream will contain contaminant chloride and chlorine dioxide, which, news flash, you don't want to breathe.

There is no way on Earth anyone would ever prefer this to just conducting electrolysis on the water that you've already purified.