The reason there are extreme left candidates is that the Democrats picked the ONE candidate they will run in the main election. At best they will pick an average Democrat, but because they are NOT using RCV they will probably pick an extremist who appeals to the greatest fraction (far less than 1/2) of them. In RCV there would be a bunch of Democrats and Republicans and others running in a SINGLE election. Yea you can vote for your favorite extremist as #1, but you will also rank people in the middle higher than your opposing side, and since this happens in both directions, the center will win.

It is obvious that opponents of RCV are resorting to outright LIES now. Pretty low.

Sterilization probably is not needed for the Moon. Most things die and we have already contaminated it plenty anyway.

I agree there is something fishy about this. Not only will it leave the 2 landers on Mars without a test platform on Earth, it will also leave PROMISE without a test platform on Earth! I'm also surprised the test platform has a working RTG generator when there probably is a wall outlet it could have used instead, though perhaps they wanted to be absolutely authentic.

Last I checked power plants are not free.

You are lying. It is not becoming. Ranked choice would prevent the extreme left candidates we are getting. You know that.

Also I believe various ranked-choice algorithms will elect centrists, even if the extremes are not equidistant from the center. The main problem is that the candidates have to be distributed in a way that matches the population, it may be that only extremists want to get into politics. In that case ranked-choice will choose the extremists nearest the center and still be an improvement.

I would agree MAGA has moved much more to the right than the "DSA" candidates have moved left. However they have both moved away from the center.

Both parties are electing extremists. This is because our voting system is broken.

Some sort of ranked choice or approval, and STV for electing more than one representative per election, would work. Unfortunately the party in charge (of either side) does not want that because it means their extremists will lose. So this likely will never be fixed.

The advantage of small reactors is that (in theory) you could build a plant with 20 or so of them. This would make them less expensive because they would all share the support infrastructure. The reason this would be less expensive than a single big reactor is that they can be individually shut down for maintenance, so a SMR that only works 50% of the time is useful, while a big reactor has to work 99.9% of the time. Obviously as you stated they also have to make SMRs work at all and at a price that is less than 1/20 of a big reactor, which has not been proven yet.

The fantasy that towns would put a single SMR in their town square or a data center will put it in their basement are just that, fantasies. But clusters could be a deal changer for nuclear.

It's transaction fees that are the problem with credit cards.

"Now that same mob has blocked me for trying to bring an intellectually diverse group of thinkers and editors to the site," Translation: "That mob blocked my mob!!!!". Sorry he lost me there, I was sympathetic earlier, but he blew it with that.

The flying system seems to be the same one used in Thunderbirds.

I think at one time they did say they had antigravity of some sort. Apparently all it can do is make the ship weightless, and you need rockets in order to make it move around or change it's velocity.

The moon base set, as well as a lot of the models, were built for continuing the show UFO which was pretty successful at the time. That however got cancelled in the USA, and they had to come up with some new idea that reused the sets. That led to this strange story...

Orbital Factories are unlikely to employ very many human workers.

For used cars, at least, I would like to test-drive the actual one I am buying. It is not clear from the description whether this is possible though.