Honestly if you think this is going to work, I'd advise you get out of IT, you're not devious enough to imagine how people will get around this. Image feature hashes that are robust to minor changes to the image are hard, and they're just a 2D problem.

What you're proposing is going to turn 3D printers from simple microcontroller based printers into something requires a fairly sophisticated AI in order to try and understand the shapes being sent to them. See you're not just going to have to block guns, you're going to have to block EVERY variation of ways you can slice that gun up into parts that can be printed individually and turned into a gun. It's a fools errand

This is the one thing that puzzled me. Biochar is used to adsorb heavy metals out of things.

This is what happens when your grid capacity auctions are badly designed. Especially if you need 11 weeks of other load you can price that in to ensure other kinds of power don't go broke.

I suspect the ones who will get to say is the EU, specifically I suspect this will prompt an investigation as to whether this breaches the common charger directive. Given:

I suspect Nintendo may find themselves in trouble here if they've broken USB PD. They don't have to allow 3rd party interfaces to audio/video/etc under that directive but you should be able to charge at full speed via that port.

Endless subcontracting is indeed an issue but even if you get rid of that it's still a hard problem. The hard bit is actually doing it whilst keeping the system running. You really can't afford to get this wrong, get it wrong and trains go smack, people die. You can't really close lines for long periods of time without causing huge issues so it needs a lot of careful planning. In many ways it would be simpler to build a set of new lines than upgrades.

citation needed

The answer was and still is natural gas. It was what was killing coal before all the stuff like carbon credits came along and will continue to do so. The turbines are pretty much the same tech. What makes the difference is that the boilers are so much easier to maintain, no clinker build up, etc. It fires up quicker and shuts down easier too. The US is still a net oil producer and gas is a constant by-product, there's even a thriving export market for it.

Whenever I see a story like this about a company that has issued a mandate without thinking it through I see it as a market signal, sell sell sell. The logic is simple, what it tells me is that the executives of that company have lost touch with the business. At a minimum I expect them to at least have the facts and figures available to them to make decisions. If they are screwing up on stuff like this, then you can bet they're making other bad business decisions just because they honestly don't know what is going on and at "going with their gut".

I mostly hear this argument from people who are just repeating what someone else told them. The truth is this is why you don't use premium grade 1 arable land for solar arrays. It wouldn't make financial sense for a farmer to do this, nor are you likely to get planning consent, believe it or not people have thought about this. In the UK we use the ALC system to grade land. Most solar arrays will be built on subgrade 3b (Moderate) or worse land and you can still graze sheep under it.

The biggest problem for the French here is that this was an early model in a new generation of French reactors, the EPR. It's essentially a productionised prototype with all the fun that this entails. Curiously the Chinese and the Finns have apparently managed to build this design with a few hiccups but a lot less delay. The British Hinkley Point C has been built with less overruns than the French but still way over budget. Each time they build it it gets easier and there's a proposal for an updated EPR2 design which will supposedly be easier to build. One does wonder though whether there's something about the French and British management culture which is causing this inability to deal with challenges when building something new? Too much subcontracting?

Nice for some. The practical problem here in the UK is that we've passed peak production in the North Sea, particularly in our exclusive economic zone. There are still exploitable reserves yet to be drawn on but they're in deeper harder to reach spots and thus less profitable. It's cheaper to import gas from Norway than exploring and extracting these fields (and contrary to popular misconception the UK is still exploring and moving fields into production at this point).

This is why the UK is making big bets on wind and nuclear, this is our energy independence. Wind is intermittent yes but with a large inter-connectors to Europe to sell excess and cover shortage plus by converting old hydro lakes into pumped storage we have a plan. It's not a perfect plan but it reflects the economic realities of our situation.

No no, these cameras need to be installed as standard in every home just in case the police need them. Wouldn't want to tip the criminals off by installing them with a warrant, after all it's for the children. We'll just turn them on when we suspect you. If you've consented to warrantless backdoors in your phone without a police investigation, you should be okay with that right?

Draw me a line then. The majority of kids who have been abused are abused by a family member or a friend. Therefore we should require government cameras in every home to ensure some kids don't suffer or even die. Would you support this? If not why not, where do you draw the line?

Nah it's a crime in most states under state law rather than federal. Examples of "Theft by deception" as a state crime are New Jersey, Georgia, PA, etc, etc. Hardly just American Samoa. I suggest that maybe you didn't google it?

You jest but a few years back 23andMe put out a paper on the genetics of breast size and density. Unfortunately it turns out thereâ(TM)s a nasty correlation between density+size and cancer.

The trouble is naïve raw capitalism has a dirty little problem it is well known to not work well for, and that is externalities. When we drive we aren't actually paying for all we consume, we are foisting it on the rest of us. Capitalism only efficiently solves these kind of problems when they are actually priced into the market. To properly have a capitalist solution to GHG within the time limits we have you'd need to price carbon far more aggressively into the market than it is now. My main issues with that are people get whiny about it and I'm not convinced of the evidence base of carbon offsets. You'd have to directly fund alternatives to fossil fuels from it and that makes people whine a lot.