I wonder if the spike of price in the last two days has anything to do with certain events in and around a certain building with a dome...

Social media profiting from outrage was evident to so many people a few years ago. Comments like yours has become much rarer unfortunately, people tend to believe that Google or Facebook is interested in solving the issue of extremism.

My problem with this scenario is the same as with gun ownership: it can work, if the access to technology is more or less equal, but too much inequality in the distribution is undemocratic, causes too much imbalance in power. Like when a few economically and physically capable persons can hoard quality weapons while most of the public is left with grandpa's shotgun. In the theoretical situation, when armed citizens resist something they consider tyranny, the outcome of the struggle depends on who is better armed/prepared for fight, not who is right. All that said, that surveillance by citizens would be better, than the situation of today, where only businesses and authorities have their cameras in public places.

Yes, if other social programs remain the same, it misses the point (unless the amount spent on social programs was too little). It still means that the problem is not with a UBI, but with other, less effective programs.

Firstly, this one is not really universal basic income, as the recipient families are selected. The fundamental idea of UBI is that *everyone* gets a certain amount of cash (or more likely credit), regardless if that one is a billionaire or a homeless person. Taxation (flat or progressive) doesn't disappear. Secondly, it's not just a leftist/sjw/marxist/reptilian-hillary-conspirator idea. Friedrich Hayek supported such a scheme himself.

"The researchers will now examine how the stored energy can be released from the energy-rich form of the molecule in the best way." - from TFA.

Actually, two or three are the required minimum for unnamed sources. The problem might be, that the article leans on those sources to channel an opinion about a person. Though the cited sources don't state directly the implied opinion themselves (which is a big no-no in more serious media especially if it's a negative opinion), the end result is the same. So the authors got through a questionable sentence without breaking their ethical code of conduct (I'm sure Reuters has such a thing).

Are the carbon rods (I guess they are the electrodes submerged in the "van" or whatever the molten aluminium will be in) the source of the high CO2 output, or the generation of energy required? In the latter case renewable energy would lower the environmental impact.

The word "capitalism" and "capitalist mode of production" was made popular by Marx, who also associated exploitation by capitalists (the workers get less wage than the value of their work) with it. Only problems are, it's still unclear what is the real value of a given amount and type of work, and that definition of exploitation can be fit to a number of other economic systems, which are generally not called capitalism. "Capitalism" feels to me a mishy-mashy expression perfect to be thrown around by politicians (from left and right) and other public figures eager to sell their social ideas, but it won't make those ideas clearer (perhaps that's the point).

Let's just hope the operators won't become numb seeing those pictures.