Whenever an authoritarian demagogue tries to justify a power grab by telling you, "Think of the children," look them in the eye and respond, "I am."

If and when you find yourself in a jurisdiction where some sort of age verification law is in effect, just remember that it's very unlikely that the law will require the date to be given in the Gregorian Calendar. There are many other possibilities, and as an example, here's a website that can convert your birth date into the Hebrew Calendar. This has many advantages: first, the date is written from right to left, not left to right, which should have interesting effects on any software trying to use it. Also, of course, the names of the months are different as is the year number. And, just to make things even more confusing, the conversion is different for different years, largely because some of the months have a different number of days in different years to avoid certain holidays landing on the wrong day of the week, and Hebrew leap years are done by duplicating a specific month. I'm sure that there are other examples, but this is the one I'm familiar with. Feel free to list other interesting possibilities.

I came here to look for this and add it if I didn't find it.

Lunar "soil" is essentially neutral, just needs some additives. Conversely, Martian "soil" is actually poisonous. Additives alone aren't sufficient to get things to grow in it, you need to remove the poisonous parts first.

Net: It's easier to grow plants in lunar rather than Martian "soil".

No, the judge isn't lying to the jury, the judge is reading a set of jury instructions that were agreed on by all of the lawyers involved in the case during a conference with the judge. And, each of the instructions is in written form and must be read out to the jury exactly as written. If one or more of those instructions includes a statement that under certain specific circumstances that the jury MUST find the defendant guilty, that's what the judge tells the jury, no ifs ands or buts.

This is an impossibly bad idea. Maybe the worst idea ever. You can't imagine how bad of an idea this is. Believe me. I've seen a lot of bad ideas, and this one knocks them all out of the park.

People don't even want to work in the office. Why expect someone to come in for an interview?

Just make an in-person interview part of the hiring process. If they want to know why, give them some mumbo jumbo about security requirements. And don't worry about chasing away legitimate applicants; if they're not willing to come in for an interview, they're unlikely to make good employees.

Those monkeyflowers better watch out for tiger lilies

Yes! If those monkey flowers make too much trouble, Tiger Lily will pluck them all.

Just to toss in a bit on film trivia, those recliners were invented by Alan Hale Sr., who played Little John in the Errol Flynn version of Robin Hood, and was The Skipper's father.

I too am retired, but at the end of my career, I was doing mostly tech support by phone. Not in the phone firewall, or reading cheat sheets to callers, but at senior level, where either the cheat sheets didn't help, or, more likely, where the juniors had picked the wrong one. That meant that I actually had to know how to fix things on my own rather than hoping that I could guess which canned response would work, and an AI probably wouldn't be any help, because if it could fix things, the junior wouldn't have needed my help.

Why don't these projects get into Xray lasers or radio wave lasers?

We've been using them for almost half a century. There's even a special name for them that you might be familiar with: Maser. They work quite well in communications and have probably a large number of applications that I'll let you find for yourself if you're interested.

I doubt that you've ever bothered to try to understand my posts, preferring to assume that I wrote what you wanted me to, but let me assure you that your apparent assumption is completely wrong in this case. I have never written or implied that I know the answer to that question, and your claim here that I have just goes to prove that you can't be bothered to understand what's written before making a "reply" that only goes to show your own ignorance.

Just because we don't understand or experience other higher or lower realities does not mean they do not exist. Besides, we have evidence that they do, it's just that fundamentalists refuse to consider examining the evidence and refuse to question thier own assumptions and beliefs.

The same could be said about atheists.

That is unless anyone has definitive and incontrovertible proof to the contray. I'm sure we'd all appreciate seeing it.

Remember, the lack of proof that something exists is not, in itself, proof that it doesn't exist.

I can remember when they did this with glass bottles, back in the '50s and '60s, but it was called a deposit. You paid a few cents more when you bought whatever it was, usually soda, beer or booze, and got it back when you brought in the empties, even if it wasn't the same store you bought it from. There were even homeless, or nearly homeless people salvaging them from dumpsters to buy food or whatever.

You know like some "you must be at least this sane to use the chatbot" kind of thing.