The idea that streaming 30 minutes of video results in 1.6 kg of CO2 emissions was recently debunked*, and now we have this, in the absence of properly sourced numbers in context, steaming pile.

*: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programm... (spoiler: better estimate is 20g)

The quote was from the 2014 decision, which was appealed and mostly upheld.

That was the argument: "As detailed below, through the extensive requirements CNN placed on TVS through the [Electronic News Gathering Service Agreements], its decisive role in TVS’ collective-bargaining negotiations and its direct role in the assignment, direction, and supervision of the TVS employees, CNN exerted significant control over the essential terms and conditions of employment of the TVS employees."
https://www.chamberlitigation....

Undoing a slip in moderation.

And note "buildings, land, lab equipment, computers and other items" are included in assessments. I'm guessing Apple (and Genentech) are arguing the values of the latter items have depreciated per some accounting rule, rather than using the real-world resale value.

Screen caps of a series of tweets posted to Facebook.

It's due to the risk of chargebacks from people that buy something that subsequently loses value. You often can't buy stocks using a credit card for the same reason.

You may be thinking of cases where people are paralyzed but still conscious - for surgery you may be given separate drugs render you unconscious and immobilize you, and if they get the mix wrong you get the above nightmare.

Context and emotional content matter. The statement "Your restaurant has no fire insurance" is a statement of fact, by itself not a threat. However, if this statement was made in response to your statement "We'll be using a different meat supplier," a reasonable person might interpret it as a threat.

As I read it:
54% of people buy or rent.
33% of people buy or rent in addition to streaming.
Implying 21% buy or rent but do not stream.

It's a PayPal-branded MasterCard issued by Synchrony Bank. But yeah, nothing particularly special or different.

The US indicted 6 VW execs for breaking US law. Schmidt had the misfortune of being in the US when the indictments came down. Presumably the other 5 are avoiding getting anywhere near US soil.

Nothing, except for Article VI:

Article VI
States Parties to the Treaty shall bear international responsibility for national activities in outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, whether such activities are carried on by governmental agencies or by non-governmental entities, and for assuring that national activities are carried out in conformity with the provisions set forth in the present Treaty. The activities of non-governmental entities in outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, shall require authorization and continuing supervision by the appropriate State Party to the Treaty. When activities are carried on in outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, by an international organization, responsibility for compliance with this Treaty shall be borne both by the international organization and by the States Parties to the Treaty participating in such organization.

I'm curious where the BBC got that Prof. Sharkey called for a ban. He doesn't call for a ban in the report, and the only mention of a ban is a quote from a another report where someone calls it shortsighted.

http://responsiblerobotics.org...

Summary and Conclusion
Question 7:
Would sex robots help to reduce sex crimes?
This is a question that suffers major disagreement. On one side, there is a small number who believe that expressing disordered or criminal sexual desires with a sex robot would satiate them to the point where they would not have the desire to harm fellow humans. On the other side, there are scholars and therapists who believe that this would be an indulgence that could encourage and reinforce illicit sexual practices. This may work for a few but it is a very dangerous path to tread and research could be very difficult. It may be that allowing people to live out their darkest fantasies with sex robots could have a pernicious effect on society and societal norms and create more danger for the vulnerable. Currently there is a lack of clarity about the law on the distribution of sex robots that are representations of children.

If it has a Venus-like atmosphere, which seems likely that close to its star, the thick atmosphere might do a good job of diffusing, trapping, and spreading the heat around the planet. IIRC, despite it's nearly year-long day, Venus has a fairly uniform temperature all over the globe.