The lasers are really not the expensive part. You've been able to get fairly powerful laser tubes and matching power supplies for low hundreds of dollars for quite some years now, that's why there are cheap laser cutters available. The expensive part is everything else, plus profit for someone.
Glyphosate is cheap enough, but are the resistant seeds?
Weed-zapping robots are still very expensive, so yes, still cheaper.
Another question we could ask would be whether the total cost including ecological impact is less, but then we'd get into a debate which is unfortunately irrelevant to farmers who are trying to make a profit year on year.
That's unnecessarily rude. I don't take that tone with you, and I'd appreciate similar consideration.
I don't coddle Nazis. Get fucked.
You're not even sure how agriculture works, "bro".
To which claim do you take exception?
The author concludes that had they looked at the same research, they likely would have come to the same conclusions.
Yes, that's the point, and the other links support the point in an ordered fashion. Your analysis of the links in question explain why that is the case. The USA deliberately avoids looking at evidence in general, that's our SOP. For example when you see claims made by US agencies that there are no studies that show or there is no evidence that something is true, what it means is that they are discarding all foreign studies which do not check meaningless boxes that are required for our agencies to consider them valid.
Well, Democrats are the ones who cited States-rights to preserve slavery, segregation, and Jim Crowe.
SCOTUS gets to decide if state law can override federal law (and the odds of the state winning on that, especially with the current justices, are slim).
But muh states rights! Oh wait, I forgot those are only for slavery.
my feeling is that glyphosate is probably a lot safer than anything that we try to replace it with, that works as well
The intelligent thing to replace it with is zero-tilth regenerative agriculture, which doesn't require weed killer.
When anything has been used as much a glyphosate and the only people sure of it's toxicity are lawyers
You're not even sure how apostrophes work, bro.
Go to Lowe's hardware and get a container of new Roundup and read the label. The new stuff in there is surely more toxic than glyphosate and is more chemically kin to Agent Orange and paraquat
Glyphosate is underlabeled thanks to lots of money applied to government by Monsanto, still the world's largest producer of it.
I want robots with lasers that selectively kill eucalyptus trees. Those are the ones that explode in wildfires and spread embers over a wide area.
It's probably better not to fire lasers at the explosive trees.
Fun story, one time when I was a kid I came across some eucalyptus trees which someone had planted along a ravine and, as a good citizen, I chopped them the fuck down with a wooden stake. Well it turns out that the people who planted them saw me do it and complained. At the time I was living in a trailer park, and the person they complained to was the park manager. Well, the place they had planted those trees was on a neighboring property and which could have led to liability for both those people and the park itself, and the manager told them to go fuck themselves.
TL;DR: I am that robot, but sans LASER
Jealous much?
Self-owns are still owns, but not what you imagined you had there.
You should've seen this place back in the day. Some folks here actually believed Musk's schtick about how they'd eventually make an affordable Tesla.
I was willing to believe it up until the point it was obvious it wasn't going to happen, i.e. when they raised prices instead of dropping them.
Not hating Elon before he demonstrated himself to be a massive piece of shit is actually a mark of a rational person, just like hating Elon once he did is.
If Musk is correct, Altman carried out probably the worst case of fraud against a non-profit and its donors in American history.
Great, now do DOGE.
The fact is that not only are there no heroes in this story, there are only the worst pieces of shit imaginable.
Never been a particular fan of Bill Gates but he was right to say "The picture of the world's richest man killing the world's poorest children is not a pretty one,"
He had firsthand knowledge, since the Gates foundation won't provide vaccinations to nations which don't adopt IP protections for big pharma so strong that even if their whole nation is dying, they can't produce a patented vaccine themselves without winding up owned through the WTO.
We have robots which can do that, but they will not be cheaper than glyphosate for the foreseeable future, so they won't be used. And any time soon, they will be MASSIVELY more expensive, so it's not realistic that they will be mandated any time soon either.
The science is on the manufacturer's side.
What?
https://publichealth.gmu.edu/n...
https://www.sciencedirect.com/...
https://www.pan-europe.info/pr...
https://link.springer.com/arti...
You wouldn't know science if it gave a lecture up your ass.
Remember, even if you win the rat race -- you're still a rat.
