No, the good feelings (a segment of the base liked it initially) have come to an end. The illegal Trump attack ("war" is something congress authorizes -- this is an illegal attack and should be named as such) won't end for a long, long time. Iran has no reason to back down, as it gives the rulers more power, not less.

Nah, that's just the usual noise of their venal incompetence. There's stories about their counter-productive screw-ups all the time. I am not saying the article above isn't right or the issue isn't important, but Trump thinks a phone is just a product/object. it's something made by little people -- he doesn't understand computer security or anything algorithmic.

My vote here is on how he created a slush fund to push $1.776 billion of tax-payer dollars to his buddies. There's a lot of chatter about how this is MAJOR BAD.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/p...
https://fitzpatrick.house.gov/...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

etc.

Your battery has way, WAY more miles than you're going to need. You can charge overnight on 110v to keep it topped up, but if you have a night when you can't charge, your battery will still have plenty of miles, and you'll catch up on charging over the course of a few nights or the weekend.

It's just not a big deal.

Yeah, I just did one to an area with very few chargers. It was FINE.

You can buy a fairly modern, used Model S for $12.k now.

The decline in bird population is due to crowding and reduction of food sources. Birds are often insectivores. If you want more birds, stop directly killing the bugs, and stop creating mono-culture ecosystems which cannot support bugs (grass lawns).

Crowding is harder. Crowding birds together again reduces food sources, but also increases disease spread. Adding greenspaces would at lease help there. Drawing birds where you want them seems like exactly what not to do.

Dude. When you have more electricity, you have cheaper electricity. And even now, it's cheaper for most deliveries to use electric vehicles, and not by a small margin. The reason they use gas now is that's what they own. Small operators don't know how much they'd save with electric and are fearful, and buy new gas trucks. Most larger operators are buying a mix of gas and electric, and will move, as we have more cheap electricity to almost completely electric fleets. Kneecapping wind farms only slows slightly the transition already underway.

Please someone answer this. I think there are no articles at all, but my understanding of Korean is way basic.

Have these guys never been in a cab in Korea?

Korea way better maps software than google maps and has had it for years. Every single good-sized building in Seoul is laid out in 3D on the map, so you can identify it -- and you need that because you have to navigate to Jangmi Castle 11D, which is one of 13 building which all look basically alike in a cluster. The Korean navigation software is SWEET and makes you envious -- we could really use that stuff in the US.

I suspect Google will come in, offer their stuff, and then be mystified as to why nobody uses it except western visitors (of which yes, there are a good number).

I am a government contracting officer for 22 years and more than 34 years government service. The article is FUD. Pure disinformation. SAM.gov (System for Award Management) has been around for 14 years at least. The goal is to centralize all contracting information systems to make it easier to find stuff. Many different systems are gradually being integrated over a long period. It was first rolled out to replace the Central Contractor Registration at least as far back as 2012. Then it integrated Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps was where RFPs were posted) in 2018-2019. RFPs are now posted at SAM.gov. Since then CPARS, PPIRS, and FAPIIS (past performance tracking) have been rolled in a few years back. They are in the process of integrating eSRS (small business usage reporting) right now. In some cases SAM is a new implementation (like replacement of FedBizOpps) and in others, it is merely a link to take you to the old system (like CPARS) which still exists but no longer have their old homepage. I will admit SAM.gov is clunky, but that is more a function of trying to unify a gazillion different systems with incompatible data formats into anything coherent using the lowest bidder IT contractor.

Yep, we should grow our own Cacao, create our own French cheeses, and not export anything we make.

Globalization is not about product movement. It's about finding cheap labor. And that can be targeted much, much more intelligently than via tariffs.

Tariffs are ALMOST always a bad idea. Can we not just always go to black and white?

The current round of tariffs are insanity, yes. We should have tariffs in the bag of tools, used only when they actually make sense, which is rare.

Economics does rule the day, which is why we have such resistance. You need to remember that the only economics which matter in this situation are how much the executives are making. And the more it all costs, the more money is in the system, and the more money that can be skimmed. If they make the system cheaper, they make less personally.

This will be the case some day, with perhaps some renewables we don't even think of right now thrown in. But in the next 20 years or so, it's definitely solar, wind, then gas (yes, I hate that too, but it's WAY better than coal or wood, etc) plus batteries.

The real limit here is batteries. When we have enough batteries, we can start retiring the gas. But it's going to be an economic decision. At some point it will cost 1 cent more to keep a gas system running than to set up enough batteries to handle things, and on that day it'll flip. But when it's 1 cent cheaper to have gas, they'll keep gas. And making that 1 cent judgment has to include costs you wouldn't even think of -- like buying votes, cleaning land after gas generator removal, and free publicity. Remember the gas systems are built already, staffed already (and the staff in those places is more than at battery sites and votes for what their bosses tell them to), and have defined risks that no one sued them for last year, making the chances that they'll win any new lawsuit higher, etc. It's complex.

(Note that in general, gas, which has a whole supply chain from drilling to refining to moving it around to burning it requires people -- and those people can be used as leverage when getting things from the government. Example: AT&T/Bell was famous for not automating in Illinois to keep head-count high. "Give us this rate hike/loan/stock grant for executives easement, or we'll put X of your voters out of work.")

The movement towards renewables + batteries with no gas is not really stoppable. But it's going to take time. And while we fight for it, we need to attack complex realities, not just "Well, DUH!" even though that's now clearly fundamentally right.

The terrible news which is actually good news is that the people running these systems do not give a damn about profits after they leave. At some point, giving them a golden parachute to do the right thing can accomplish this. They won't care that the leverage and obscene profits will dry up, if they are personally set.

HAHAH! PG&E wasn't going to invest in new lines. What you should have said was

'PG&E was forced to invest into "green energy" and their lines weren't upgraded -- we should have forced them to upgrade their lines long ago.'

There is a reason our interconnect and general transmission lines are in the state they are all over the country. Power companies are putting money into the buckets which put money in their pockets -- upgrading lines over time does not do that as profitably as other placements of cash. Repeating such behavior over the long-term doesn't have a negative affect on them, because letting something decay up to the point that it's an emergency allows them to get approval to raise rates. Win-win.