It's factual that Starlink is able to do this better than anyone else (Kuiper is a possibility too, but in the future). Starlink shouldn't be denied from the contract just because it's headed by the evil Elon Musk (who stole the concept from WorldVu when they came to SpaceX for launch services). We gave billions to Verizon and AT&T to do this, and all they built was yachts for their executive staff .. I assume the yachts have cell phone service though, probably from Starlink. Yachts sailing around in the Caribbean with cell phone service -- I suppose that can be considered "rural" broadband after all.

So they can be abused. Ben Franklin on democracy: "Two wolves and a lamb deciding on what to have for dinner."

That means that whatever job the people who demand $100 to pluck fruit were doing goes unfilled.

Who did you vote for?

Um, ok. Predictions about stuff that will happen 5+ years from when it's made are nearly always wrong. It usually means we're missing some fundamental breakthrough. Mind you I believe we'll have fusion energy eventually, and need toward towards that. But when you start putting dates to it, that's BS.

When I clicked this article there were no comments on here yet. The reason my comment is 5th on here is I needed over an hour to stop laughing at the assertion that TCL is a premium brand.

Trusting ourselves to make the right decision is slightly more logical than trusting nature. If nature can be trusted, then our decisions can definitely be trusted since we're nature. We know nature didn't care that some species went extinct, who is to say it cares about keeping us around? We know that most humans at least want to keep ourselves or themselves around.

I was referring to the editorial, sort of. But I would say that human decisions and nature's decisions are separate in the sense that we are less clear about nature's "intent" vs. human intent (or at least most human intents, especially our own). Nature seemingly has no motive. We know it either doesn't seem to care or can't do anything about (at least a certain threshold of) suffering. at least for certain moments during our conscious existence.

We're going to trust Nature's "decisions" why? The premise of it is stupid. It could have gone extinct for a variety of reasons, but it doesn't mean it doesn't have some qualities that could serve us today. Besides, there are indications that humans are the ones who drove it to extinction. We can't miss out on woolly mammoths because some of our ancestors were evil or stupid. Nature is full of shit that can fuck us up. Nature created pedos, it created killers. It's not some benevolent. It also created the woolly mammoth and then did what, declared it useless? That's stupid.

We're going to trust Nature's "decisions" why? The premise of it is stupid. It could have gone extinct for a variety of reasons, but it doesn't mean it doesn't have some qualities that could serve us today. Besides, there are indications that humans are the ones who drove it to extinction. We can't miss out on woolly mammoths because some of our ancestors were evil or stupid.

Republicans are working on that -- they've got multiple paths to WW3 .. by promoting everything from destabilizing Europe or annoying China to climate change .

Far right.

Your side believes all of those though. You're responsible for everything and individual on your side says, believes, and does .. since you a tribalist. That's the whole point of being one.

It's useful for placing documents side by side or for glancing at a process/animation .. readability isn't the primary goal.

That brushing twice daily with regular flossing can help keep your teeth clean and prevent cavities?