Thanks for the detail. I've gone off and read a couple of heatpipe and vapour chamber manufacturers' overview and comparison pages and am now better informed.

So it seems. The description perfectly matches that of a heatpipe.
Should Apple's offering make it from vapourwear to product, I look forward to people telling me how revolutionary it is to have this brand new technology I've had in my desktop PC for over a decade.

> unobstructed you

There's water vapour in the air, which will absolutely attenuate signal in an open space with atmosphere.

I might even get on board with a conversation about practicalities of imprisonment for people doing pump and dump if we could just see our way to asset stripping and lightly imprisoning the slew of greedy and rapacious ne'er-do-wells responsible for the 2008 crash.

High on my list would be both people responsible for lobbying for and those enacting less financial market regulation through legislative changes.
Also featuring in prime spots would be fund operators who took home scads of bailout money, and who instead of drawing only a token salary actually gave themselves bonuses for their outrageous failure.

I'm not sure to what extent your average Australian is calling a digital image promoted by China "appalling". The Prime Minister certainly seems to be huffy about it, but the sentiment I've heard and read which seems most coherent is that people think the PM should have been more reserved and emotionally mature, and perhaps not given this image any particular oxygen.

A disarming response might have been to acknolwedge the picture as an artistic criticism of a terrible but occasionally inevitable consequence of sending armed men and women into places to kill other humans. If China continues to ignore the PM's demand to depublish the image (Streisand effect FTL) it will not improve perception of the PM in the eye of Australia's public because he will have angrily demanded a thing with no demonstrable effect.

I think Australians generally who are aware that some of their soldiers committed acts which are offensive even to people whose job it is to kill other people for a living aren't very happy about the acts perpetrated, nor the perpetrators.

That fly would likely have died of old age by now, wouldn't it? Although a dead housefly might not be a bad president; it's not something we've seen before.

Electricity prices have been trending downward very recently after quite a long period of increases, but electricity in South Australia are generally about twice the price of electricity in the cheaper states.

Around 2004 I remember seeing a friend's power bill in New South Wales and they were being charged 12c per kilowatt hour while it was closer to 24c kWh in South Australia.

I paid a power bill in SA recently and the cost was about 38c kWh. There's some variation between the various retailers.

Insolation in Australia is very high, so the yield from installing PV is pretty good. In 2013 it was estimated that the cost of electricity provided by PV installations was about half the cost of the same power supplied by the grid. With efficiency increases in solar cells and the continual decrease in price of solar electricity components, coupled with the high price of grid-sourced electricity in Australia, uptake of solar is probably the highest per capita of any country in the world.

Australia has some domestic solar panel and electronic manufacturers, but the panels installed over the last decade and a bit would be from a mix of manufacturers including from China and Europe.

During the early push to get domestic solar electricity happening in Australia there were a number of rebate and feed-in tarrif schemes to make the initial cost more affordable until economy of scale benefits led to initial costs being more affordable.

Rebate and tarrif schemes have been wound back considerably in recent years and typically you'll be paid the wholesale price for any power you supply to the grid, but charged at the retail price for any electricity you source from the grid, however with the cost of grid electricity in Australia it's possible to have a PV system pay for itself in as little as 2.5 years.

>it’s legal because you are buying in good faith.

Would you mind explaining what this means, please? I've just read through the site's terms and conditions, and found there are some examples of music I'd listen to, but the price per track or album is markedly lower than those same tracks bought directly from the artist. I can't understand how a track bought from a reseller can be priced lower than that track directly from an indie artist with their own online store.

If it's not OK for megacorporations to use their platform to push an agenda with political implications, why is it OK for traditional media to exhibit even greater bias, and to present threadabare fabrications as factual to a seemingly captive audience who believe whatever they're told by their preferred supplier of lies?

From one person with bad karma to another, I disagree with a lot of your post. I'm not from America, and fortunately have largely lived in a place which doesn't suffer from what looks like rabid and nonsensical bipartisan affiliation.

Those things you claim "everyone knows" aren't actually things that everyone agrees with. I think some of them are factually wrwong, and one of your points I don't know enough about to have an opinion.

A lot of this Republican vs Democrats behaviour (the stuff where you yell truisms at each other and state that the other's points are invalid for some apparently incorrect reason) that has grown to a fever pitch over the last 15 years looks a lot like the Holden Vs Ford affililation arguments that happened in lower primary school where I grew up. Both sides seem passionate about their stated beliefs to the point that they can't have a factually driven conversation in any rational sense.

It worries me that the same sort of behaviour has started to become a little apparent where I live, because I see what it seems to be doing to the USA, and from the outside none of it looks good.

It's quite weird to watch an apparent outcry in response to some large companies who seem to epitomise the American capitalist fantasy, when a lot of thing things you're saying could and should have been levelled at traditional media for the last 20 years, and today more than ever.

When a coupe of friends independently told me that they thought the inability of the two major sides in your political configuration to have a calm and factually based argument about anything anymore heralded the end of the Union, I initially thought they were being overly dramatic. Now I'm stating to worry that you've infected yourselves with an ideology so unworkable that my friends were right, and I was wrong.

Please go back to being more sensible than crazy. You're scaring and disappointing the rest of us.

Not through any good planning or product research, but I have two audio devices that don't exhibit the gamut of annoying and stupid behaviour that's made the very word Bluetooth a source of vicious mirth in my household.

One of the devices is a dirt cheap class D amplifier which happens to have a bluetooth function. It's worked every time I've tried to connect to it, and it just plays the audio from the client device throug the speakers it drives. It has no security or any obstacle to binding random devices, and for this reason I'm pretty sure I'm going to desolder one of the components in the Bluetooth circuitry to disable it.

The other device is a cheap little mono speaker that was given to me years ago by family, and I didn't use it for a few months after getting it, because I like good quality audio and I build a lot of my own sound equipment so the appeal of a dodgy little speaker with a dodgy protocol driving it didn't likght me up with excitement. It now gets a lot of use because I have a kid now, and music during bath time is something they like. It's handy to have a speaker that by my and my partner's phones can connect to once paired, and which won't upset anybody if it gets dropped in the bath.

Every. Single. Other. Device. Every other Bluetooth device I've seen used or had used around has been an unreliable source of frustration and anger. It didn't take many iterations of this when Bluetooth devices started becoming common to lead to all Bluetooth stacks being disabled on every device we have in the house, except when it's bath time. We're happier pretending it doesn't exist, and the sense of calm that pervades from we who have discarded it seems to be infecting other family members.

What I'm getting at is that if you get any traction behind your idea to destroy all Bluetooth speakers, could you possibly leave the mint green speaker in my bathroom alone? If not, oh well, it'll be worth it.

>However, the restrictions that Australia imposed to bring the epidemic under control would not be acceptable in either Canada or the US.

Can you talk a bit about which restrictions wouldn't be acceptable to North Americans? Some family members found the restrictions on interstate travel for nonessential purposes to be a bit ghastly, and there were two funerals in the family that couldn't be attended by many people, but the complaint I hear about mostly has been that people who do social things for entertainment (clubs, pubs, live music, etc.) felt they were going crazy without the preferred method for them to let off steam.

Most states were able to prevent numbers getting out of control, and the one Australian state that was looking like it might have left things too late has rallied beautifully with harder lockdwon resulting in an impressive decrease in number of new cases per day.

I'd like to avoid talking about specific people and probably even ignore the context in which this discussion is happening, but isn't there room in the fullness of human expression for situations in which it's reasonable to want another human not to be alive anymore?

It seems to me that if we have a legal framework and practitioners thereof who talk about justice and retribution being complementary parts of the punitive component of sentencing, and we have some countries and legislatures in which the punitive process can include killing a person, then we have a framework which people seem to be willing to live within which in itself conveys the idea that it is alright to want another person to be dead.

Thinking in a more personal context, if a person is responsible for injuring or killing people you care about, is it not reasonable if we consider the way people evolved to harbour the sentiment that the party responsible for those deaths or injuries should be killed, or to wish death upon them?

And what about if you're in the armed forces. Would it be better or worose if soldiers went out and killed their enemy counterparts with the wish of death for their foe in their mind, or without that wish?

I see the sentiment echoed that a person is making a terrible mistake and has transgressed some boundary I've not seen named if they wish that another person should cease to live, but I think there are experiences in life which give rise to a perfectly acceptable desire to see a person deprived of their life. I'll grant that it's not nice, but much of mammal life isn't nice.

Which science is that? Happy Clapping prosperity churches are diametrically opposed to science, and proselytise the belief that some invisible sky daddy will make everything OK so long as they make a profit.

Even the satirical swipes being taken at the current Australian Federal Government are loaded with more scientific and factual data than anything proposed by the current coalition government.

They're also demonstrably terrible at managing the economy, according to impartial global metrics.