Try to make any ad hominem attack you want, but I'm right. Show me the success stories.

You merely reiterate my point. The left don't care about reining in the financial markets, they care about castrating kids.

Sure, it may provide some small value somewhere. But just as you don't have go to to the Moon to develop velcro, you don't have to create a giant financial casino to develop low-latency communications... you just invest the money on developing low-latency communications instead.

There is simply no world where it makes sense for the best and brightest kids to be spending their time figuring out how to take a tiny cut of transactions rather than building new things that will be useful to everyone.

In my experience it seems that consultants are often only hired to justify things that managers can't justify. Once they hire a consultant and the consultant tells them they should do the thing they want to do, they can do it with no further justification and blame the consultants when it all goes wrong.

AI should be pretty good at that.

I know of several companies who are avoiding hiring anyone with a degree for that reason; it's much cheaper to hire competent people without degrees than to hire people with degrees who expect much higher pay so they can pay off their loans.

But they're small to medium sized companies who aren't being strangled by HR.

HR is basically Political Commissars for business. It's quite insane that anyone let it grow from what should be a tiny part of the business to a cancer that's destroying so many.

I've had about ten jobs since I left school and not one has ever asked for proof of my grades. I didn't even bother getting my degree certificate until I had to send a copy for a visa application; they're the only people who've ever asked to see it.

That said, it may be different now that HR has taken over running so many companies.

> Anytime we want we could shut them down but we would have to change how we vote.

No major party wants to rein in the financial markets. I'm not sure about Harris, but I remember Clinton getting more donations from financial companies than Trump.

> The next time you're getting upset because somebody gave their kid puberty blockers or somebody said happy holidays ask yourself how many hours a year you worked so that you could get upset about that.

Imagine if the left had spent the last ten years pushing for reining in the financial markets instead of castrating kids.

Imagine what the world could be like if we didn't take a large portion of the smartest kids in the country to have them work on how to skim 0.00001% of every financial transaction and instead employed them doing something useful instead.

History will see this as an absolutely insane waste of potential.

From what I know digital signage displays are a lot more than consumer TVs. They will last forever, but the down side is they are not great to watch content with lots of motion.

Cute, but I think reality would like a few words:

Planning permission. Especially so in Europe, maybe not such a problem with Trump, apart from the fact he *hates* anything "green".
Geology. Not all ground is suitable for building a heavy structure like a dam, or retaining the water it would hold back, reducing the number of glaciers this could apply to somewhat, and a proper survey can take a lot of time. You definitely do not want to build a dam on unsuitable ground.
Geography. You'd need to be able to get construction materials to the dam, and multiple glaciers may run off into the same valley, reducing the number of potential locations for hydro even further. Also, in the kinds of places where you find a lot of glaciers (mountainous regions, duh!), the valleys tend to be heavily used for things like habitation and agriculture, which would need relocating first.
The clock is ticking. Once the glaciers are gone, your dams are only going to be dealing with runoff from precipitation. Which isn't what it used to be where the glaciers are or the glaciers wouldn't be shrinking in the first place.

So, even with a viable location, you've got to get planning permission, relocate anything in the way, build the dam & turbines, connect it to the grid, and generate as much electricity as you can before... Oh, wait, wasn't there a glacier up there when we started?

The next admin won't be able to force manufacturers to make EVs because the AI data centres will be sucking up all the available electricity.
They're more likely to ban EVs to free up electricity.

No, it's because your arguments about capitalism are frequently about the moral failures of capitalism. But every time I've seen you make that argument you make it as if it's not a human problem and socialism or communism wouldn't have those issues. It's not that it's a left wing argument being voted down. It's just a nonsensical argument.

Which would mean its casing is currently being (or already has been) abraded by the bedrock and all the bits and pieces of gravel and larger detritus that typically lies at the bottom of a glacier and get churned around as the glacier slowly flows downslope. From there, it'll be seeping into the glacial runoff water and, as TFS notes, eventually make its way into the River Ganges.

Of course, if you've actually seen (or smelled) the Ganges once it gets deeper into India, combined with what other purposes the locals use it for, including raw sewage and cremation residue disposal, you'll be well aware that it's far from the most pristine water in the world to start with. Adding a little Pu-239 over a number of years into that soup probably isn't going to make all that much of a difference in the larger scheme of things.

..shouldn't be..