Yes, basically a carbon tax paid by importers of goods. It would hit those least able to pay the most but would provide a market signal.

Neither seem politically likely, but rationing even less so.

Many years ago, I was on an interconnecting flight in the USA and the aircraft was something similar to a Norman-Britten Islander. It had little stub winglets for the main undercarriage. One of the panels had three rather than four bolts holding it on. I could see this quite clearly as I was positioned right above it and could see it flapping slightly in the airstream. No one else had noticed as it was only about 1/3 full if that. I called the flight attendant over (pilot and attendant only - meal was a choice of peanuts or not peanuts and the drink was coffee from a thermos or water). The attendant told me to keep quiet to avoid everyone suddenly rushing over to one side of the plane to look. If there had been an issue at least it would have been quick if there had been an issue as we got up to only about 3000ft with forest below. I presume the maintenance engineer simply forgot a bolt.

It's about six or seven seconds, IIRC, from cut off to the first return to run. That would be very little time to tell by scanning the cockpit then say something and for a reaction. I'm not a pilot, but it makes me wonder if that was the captain spotting fuel flow as you'd think his attention would be on either outside or instruments, at least as the first indication.

+1

One possibility is that they were replaced but incorrectly installed somehow, meaning the safety feature (pull, move, release) wasn't operating correctly. Something else to note is whether the pull, move, release operation was tested under stress - there have been many cases where it was assumed that safety features would prevent operation but in the heat of the moment people can sometimes defeat such things without even realising it. Hence, often potentially dangerous controls require a sequence of operations that aren't the sort you might do naturally as a human and are tested to determine if brute force can or cannot defeat them. For example, twist then move may be used as that's less likely than pull and move to be done easily under stress.

People in such professional situations learn to cope with being videoed or recorded. And bring on video doesn't stop soccer players taking outrageously obvious dives or people claiming they didn't say things that they obviously did (celebs, politicians of all stripes, etc).

Just checking: is the betrayal the mistress or going to see an awful, dull band like Coldplay?

Can you vibe the compatibility?

The tune is allowing distros to make Linux look like Windows so as to not frighten the horses, if they do desire.

I quite like round corners. It's customisable enough that we can both be happy. If I used KDE. Isn't choice amazing - I can choose to use curvy KDE corners or not KDE at all and you have have your eye out with sharp stuff if you like.

If my music plugins and flight sims (which I now rarely play) it would have been Linux on my desktop for the last 20 years. In terms of work, though, it has been, and for the decade and half prior it was UNIX. These days, for work, I fire up Windows occasionally for Visio and Project.

The Rentenmark was backed by gold and other industrial assets. The Roggenmark (to be pegged to rye, not wheat) wasn't adopted. Please read some history books.

:) I knew what you meant. But you gave me an opportunity to misinterpret your words for comedic effect. It's hard not to exploit such an opening :))

P.S. this also goes for restaurants tracking even public social media: in EU and UK just because someone is your customer, it doesn't give you carte blanche to gather a dossier of information on someone unless you can show it is relevant to offering them the service you offer. Even then, taking social media information unless you explicitly consented to it being compiled into a database entry would be shaky ground. You could legally compile relevant information for events that happened at your premises such as food preferences. Given that GDPR gives subjects the right to request information held (something I have done) then you might want to be careful about saying negative things. It wouldn't count as libel or slander as it wouldn't have been published but if you'd labelled a politician as a boorish pain in the behind, it might not go well for your company.

Firstly, you don't technically need any more information than name, ID, travelling intentions and payment details to sell someone a plane ticket. I'm baffled that you think more is required. A company can make a case in Europe for retaining some extra information, but they'd be on a sticky legal wicket if they retained lots of extraneous information. So whatever it is you think should be the case or is the case, legally in the EU and UK you are very wrong and case law backs me up. And yes, I have been both a data controller and made a request under GDPR, so I have actual experience of how it works. So, an example might be income - knowledge of your income might be argued as useful in terms of determining if trying to upsell a business class seat might be useful, however if it was used in Europe to modify your economy ticket price upwards, that would be a violation of law (although not GDPR). It might be just about arguable that information on your height might be relevant to offer you a seat with more leg room, but beyond that, you'd be struggling for justification under the GDPR