He was murdered and the criminal who made that decision admitted to the crime publicly (after cowardly trying to blame those he commanded)

The problem is it’s very expensive. Solar installers charge tens of thousands of dollars and has a long history of scams. They take the place of the old trope about scammy used car salesmen. They’ve created leases and PPAs in an attempt to make the initial cost easier but only succeeded in being scammy

It doesn’t help that we have tariffs and other barriers to low cost solar panel imports, yet insufficient support for domestic manufacturing to be competitive.

The math is hard. Everyone wants to know the payback threshold from the huge install cost up front but it’s not straightforward.

When I looked into solar I found

• lots of scammers, poor service
• I calculated a payback of 12 years from install cost given free energy, which is longer than I’m likely to own this house. But they claim 7?
• I only have sufficient unshaded roof for half my usage
• is it poor service or scamminess that it’s so difficult to get them to explain that?

A big part of it is being realistic about how often that would come up.

Especially for those with their own house, charging overnight at home (like you do with your phone) is more convenient. It is so nice never having to go to a local gas station!

Forget looking for discounts like Costco, charging from home is half (for me) the cost of gasoline. Everyone likes saving money

The only time this doesn’t work is road trips, where I need to stop for 20 minutes every 4-5 hours of driving. If I’m eating a meal, it’s going to take longer than that anyway.

So

• 90+% of the time an EV is more convenient and much cheaper
• on road trips where I would have stopped to eat, it’s equally convenient
• on road trips where I’m stopping more than I would otherwise and for slightly longer ……. That’s actually very rare

Edit: looking at my charging stats, it’s only been twice in the last year. One of those was a 1,200 mile road trip that did wonders to overcome my range anxiety

most Americans don’t want an EV with batteries at their current state.

That’s a risky assumption given how driven by propaganda this is. The reality is current state of batteries is perfectly fine for most Americans. What if they realize that? It does partly depend on charger availability, which is being rapidly built out despite the efforts of the current administration to block that. What happens as Americans realize how many new chargers are near them?

“War” usually implies a cause and an opponent. This is just chaotic, and against everyone

Signing (intermediate) certs have been compromised before. That means a bad actor can issue fake certs that are validated up to your root ca certs

While you can invalidate that signing cert, without useful and ubiquitous revocation lists, there’s nothing you can do to propagate that.

A compromised signing certs, effectively means invalidating the ca cert, to limit the damage

Technically not. The article makes the point that it’s more about mismanagement of existing water resources. Particularly for underground water, the affect of climate change is indirect and delayed

And it’s the same with Southern California and Arizona: reality is there’s a finite amount of water available and they’re using it faster than it’s replenished. While climate change affects replenishment and makes it worse, it’s still using water unsustainably

The challenging part is a lot of it is indirect. General incitement to violence or misinformation is difficult to tie back to directly causing harm.

Freedom of speech was simpler before internet when you were likely singled out as a kook and ignored. Now with the internet you have a much bigger audience as well as other kooks where you can build on each other. Your reach is farther, you can more easily appear to have common opinion, you can do more harm, and yet are more distanced from the harm you do.

I have no idea what to do differently but we’ve seen free speech in an online world without any accountability has been able to do a lot of harm.

There’s got to be something to do for accountability, but ….

Just want to point out the guy who made up the whole vaccine-autism scare was a scientist. All of the propaganda against anti-smoking, anti-climate change, anti-pollution, anti-lead efforts over the years has been produced by scientists

Educated people are people too. Just because they should know better doesn’t mean they are

That’s a great response for the 1970s but since then we’ve been developing awareness of the magnitude of the crisis and developing solutions. It’s been time to move on from the nineteenth century

We all should have been making better choices for half a century now. If you’re not at least making better choices today, you can’t blame lack of knowledge or lack of technology

In this case, not really Nazi, more sociopath, lack of empathy, narcissistic

At one point I looked into making jerky. It’s reasonable for people to do their own.

The big question is whether to use curing salts. They’re necessary if you want to be shelf stable. If you don’t use them, you need to refrigerate your jerky and it has limited shelf life, like any other food. However in that scenario, you have the advantage of fresher ingredients with a quality of your selection that may make up for it.

You don’t get that from store bought uncured meat

I’ve gotten pizza with “uncured” bacon, ham, or sausage before. I’m not sure if the meat has no flavor or if it was the pizza tha had no flavor.

However I expect the pizza itself was worse for me than those specific ingredients

I’d put that number a bit higher because they’re not a deterrent if any aggressor can conceive of taking them all out before you can react. But we’re already much higher than any reasonable logic like that

At like 20, someone can keep track of where they all are and plan a preemptive attack with confidence of destroying them all before you can react. Too small a number could make nuclear war _more _ likely.

The “nuclear triad” was a good concept to prevent any possibility of such an attack succeeding, so some number that can support multiple delivery mechanisms while Making a disarming attack very unlikely

The increase in non-strategic nuclear weapons (regional or battlefield) is an especially scary capability that we intentionally backed away from. Just no.

The concept of needing a massive buildup to counter emerging nuclear powers is just laughable. Do they even look at what they’re writing?

I have to admit that having some number of hypersonic missiles with nuclear warheads may be a good idea

But the missed their opportunity with hypersonic missiles. As those become available worldwide, they increase the chances of an unblockable preemptive attack occurring with no chance for reaction. We don’t need more nuclear weapons (and fewer would be preferable) but they need to be survivable enough to be a valid deterrent

Presumably it has a more direct affect on civilians, who are otherwise able to skip most of the consequences of the war. Russians going without heat over the winter will give a little taste of what they’ve inflicted on Ukraine and hopefully put some pressure on Putin. But it also affects manufacturing, both of war materials and civilian needs.

I’m sure it’s also to threaten the legitimate government into acquiescence and potentially lay the groundwork for a potential war on “terror”

That’s a great “silver bullet” answer but not realistic. By all means it’s worth encouraging but you’re not getting there any time soon.

In the meantime, farming fewer ruminants helps as well as making progress in that direction. And for those ruminants we are still farming, food additives to modify their digestive products is a clear win. And if that makes animals more expensive to eat, maybe we start a virtuous cycle toward eating fewer animals

Aside from getting people to eat less beef …… every year or two I see an article about food additives, such as certain algae’s, that help cattle produce less methane. But the story just disappears with no follow up. Whatever happens to those?

I assume part of it is cost but some of us already pay a little more for “pasture fed” “free range” “no growth hormone”. Where’s my “green” beef? I’d pay a bit more for that.

Or does it never actually pan out for practicality or taste or health or something

I hope it was an external prank. This is too likely an internal job, which narrows the list if suspects a lot