windmills kill a large number of at-risk rare large birds, and every statistics shows that. using raw bird death numbers is like saying lots of field mice die so we shouldn't worry about the small number of white rhino deaths, which is obviously ignoring the population of the species. it's sad that this transparently dishonest use of statistics are used to serve an anti-fossil fuel agenda. anyone who cares for birds not being killed by windmills most likely have many issues with dirty fossil fuels, so it's unfair to smear them as some sort of fossil fuel dupe.

opensource was about right to the end user, and these people seem to be worried about the economic model of the developers of the opensource project. i think these are somewhat orthogonal. clearly there is an issue that businesses built on top open source need to figure out, but i really don't think it's a FOSS issue. How can FOSS figure out how to limit corperations rights and still be FOSS, how can FOSS be in the business of limiting rights to software. Certainly copyleft is a specific type of limitation of rights, but that was to promote freedom, not collect fees. ultimately any license/contract or whatever that addresses this issue by legally enforcable route isn't free or open source. I cannot grab five lines of that code any use it in my project and not have to worry about it. I do think that the large SaaS companies do need to think about contributing generally to opensource more (both in terms of cash donations but also by releasing their tech/contributions), to keep the ecosystem healthy, but that doesn't make a business based on opensource viable. it makes it a charity.
Also, I think that the bigger issue isn't with this economic matter, but what thinking about what happens when we have unlimited skilled programmers via AI. That's where we are heading. How can we make the global software ecosystem (and FOSS) better with unlimited talent at our disposal.

you don't seem to understand how NPR is funded. they charge the local stations for content, and those local stations get their money from the government. so while you understate the direct funding you totally omit the indirect funding. if it really was only 1-2% then they would simply drop the funding and not have this debate.

the media has been her cheerleader. we'd only find out if there was discontent if and when she loses. I know plenty of life long democrat voters who aren't news/social media junkies that were aghast at how they took biden out.

dont forget that the left hit the power substation in the tesla factory in germany because tesla is a well know polluter.

with starship coming online and trips to the moon returning, it would be nice if scientists start planning on a future where they can move their observations off world instead of complaining that the sky is getting full. it's seems obvious that having starlink is better then not having starlink for many reasons.

the blue states cannot implement what was sold as "net neutrality" because it was about title 2 regulations and the FCC approving what plans an ISP can offer. if you look into the examples of net neutrality abuse you'd see that there really isn't any issue impacting people at all.

net neutrality was not a good description of what the regulation is. nor were the issues that proponents used to justify the massive change. if there was some sort of actual net neutrality issue, it would likely fall under FTC's purview to police anyway. at least this time we didn't have to suffer through the phony online campaign from eff/mozilla/john oliver.

i wish some liberal state would replace all their welfare programs that have high overhead with a single ubi monthly check. they could spend a lot less money on adminsitration when they micromanage the spending like all the existing programs do. it seems like the left wants UBI plus food stamps, plus subsidized housing, plus subsidiezed childcare, etc. the only issue is that this welfare/UBI needs to be tied to drug testing, and work programs.

we will need fossil fuels for probably a few more decades. hundreds of millions of people would die if all fossil fuels were turned off. this means we need to continue to invest in fossil fuel infrastructure. the roadblocks that gov't adds that is just useless pandering. for example, the gov't admits that stopping pipelines don't improve the climate, but they do it anyway. there's a pretty good discussion about how gov't "climate" policies are often worse for the environment, and certainly not cost effective compared to other policies. https://youtu.be/5Gk9gIpGvSE

i'm a fan of peak shaving, and tax breaks for home solar and home batteries, but wind power is awful. it kills so many rare birds. eventually all those wind turbines will be dismantled and people will be honest about what a terrible idea they were. shame that people preaching clean energy allowed them to turn of function nuclear power plants.

the transistor budget is better spend on other things. this is why no arm/riscV chips employ SMT/HT.

the old forklifts most likely had a large mix of electric, using lead acid batteries because they are used indoors. The total economics has more to do with maintenance and downtime due to charging, along with efficiency due to battery weight.

From amazon's press release the mention these fuelcells replacing batteries, not other fossil fuels powered forklifts. "To date, Plug has collaborated with Amazon to deploy more than 17,000 fuel cells to replace batteries in forklifts in more than 80 fulfillment centers in North America. For most of these locations, hydrogen to power the forklifts is produced elsewhere, liquified, and delivered by trucks to an on-site storage and dispensing system."

Of course it seems that amazon has a goal of using hydrogen in other parts of the transportation network, where it will replace ICE vehicles, hence linking this to climate goals.

it seem so silly to focus on co2. coal is environmentally so much worse than natural gas, people should be happy for conversion to natural gas. especially if it's done via economic pressures rather then activists using the political/legal system to accomplish it. Of course, as electrification increases it's not just the energy supply breakdown that is important, it is the electrical generation capacity that is important.

never heard an american apologize for iraq, or a french person apologize for libya. really impressive how russians are constantly forced to disavow. and discrimination against russia born athletes are common place, even when they don't represent their country.