Here's one article on wood versus plastic ... https://risklogic.com/protecti.... Relevant excerpt: Plastics usually are harder to ignite than wood, but they burn much hotter than wood.

To say nothing of unintended behavior by an accidentally mistyped indentation. Unmatched braces always generate compile errors, but a misplaced tab can potentially go undetected for an unnecessarily long time.

Headline: Musk funds cure for cancer. Haters: Yeah, his uncle had cancer. What has billionaire boy done for heart disease, kidney disease ... etc. Publicity stunt." And what, may we ask, have you done for humanity?

Wasn't the case for the Apollo accidents. It was for the Shuttle. I think a certain amount of risk has to be accepted for something as complex as space vehicles. You'll never get to zero risk. Same with cars.

Rewarding repeated failures is a bad idea and throwing good money after bad. If you want competitors, throw some money at Boeing or other companies. Heck, I'd prefer Ariane to Blue Origin - you at least get something for your money and might inspire money pits like Blue Origin to tighten up their act. Nothing motivates improvement better than competition. Safety is the refuge of the weak.

So far, LEO is unrestricted and there's room for whoever can get customers. Agreements on LEO restrictions seems unlikely. Currently 3,580 Starlink satellites, OneWeb currently 579.

As an American I would love to see Facebook gone from the entire world. Good riddance.

Your Tesla shits on the floor?

Sorry ma'am, if you'll read our policy, nowhere does it say it covers meteor impact damages.

Respice post te. Hominem te memento.

Fuckerberg is evil.

I'd like to understand this. If the central bank loans virtual dollars and the banks exchange them for printed dollars, are you talking about newly printed dollars? I would think not, because that's equivalent to printing money. If they are exchanged for dollars already in existence, then how is this different from a loan?

Hate filled. Devoid of facts. Wrong in the only verifiable claim you made.

For the sake argument let's give an example with more precise language about what he was getting at. No childish "you're stupid", "No, you're stupid."

Cheap item:
- costs $10K
- a million people are willing to buy it
- it produces 5% less pollution
- net reduction of pollution: 1000000 * .05 = 50000

Expensive item
- costs $50K
- 10000 people are willing to buy it
- It produces 50% less pollution
- net reduction of pollution 10000 * .5 = 5000

If you wish to challenge his argument, challenge his assumptions or his logic.

Beer, religion; they go together.

https://www.loyolapress.com/ou...

High calories for those skinny desert fathers.