What we're witnessing is a correction for offshoring to countries with very low wages and no tariffs since the Clinton administration. Before you get hung up on tis, this isn't a Democrat or Republican issue. This is a Wall Street and Walmart creation. Anyway, companies are looking at building here in the US again. That's a good thing. You can't bomb a target with a solar panel. I do agree that "tax the wealthy" needs to be a thing at the same time, though. Most of that money isn't creating jobs, it's doing nothing but making people wealthier at the expense of what's left of the middle class.

Uhm, ignoring the other effects? Heating up the earth while just saying, "Oh, shucks. We didn't think that out. We really shouldn't have done that." Yep, there was a tradeoff. A really stupid one.

Here's a personal one I made. I stopped eating shitty food. I got healthier. Nice tradeoff there. I started exercising. I can do a lot of stuff I was never capable of doing before. I enjoy doing physical activities I didn't used to be able to do. You're right, there are tradeoffs. I gave the "pleasure" of stuffing my face with unhealthy food and sitting around my house all of the time for instead being healthy, having hot women checking me out (and more), etc. Those were choices with tradeoffs. My point is that a lot choices can lead to positive directions, and some to poor directions. My doctor literally uses my case as an example of how somebody with diabetes can reverse it. All because of that tradeoff I made: stuffing my face for short-term pleasure vs health.

In the case I pointed out, there was no perfect outcome, but there was a better outcome. They chose the worst of the two. They had two options:

• Knowingly continue to make the earth warmer by some unknown amount while a replacement for the pollution is developed and deploy (estimated to be 5 years). Let the planet warm over those 5 years.
• Roll back and have some pollution with known and mostly harmless short-term effects known on keeping the planet cooler while the pollution replacement is developed over those same 5 years. Keep the impact on the planet temperature steady.

The former, keeping things in place, has no real positive outcome. You'll end up with slightly cleaner air at the expense of warming a warming planet. The biggest threat to life on the planet is rapid warming. Finally, the former is flat out dangerous when you don't even understand the full effects of what you're doing. This is how a lot of stupid engineering disasters happen. With the second, after 5 years, you end up with the same overall tech, but the latter doesn't warm the planet in the process. Some species may be impacted. I'm not aware one way or the other on this one, but I know it won't wipe out life. Anyway, too often what's overlooked is that sometimes pollution can be your friend. This was and is one of those cases.

I could be a douche and point out the irony of your spelling mistake, but I don't need to stoop to that level. Regardless, I stand by "an improvement is an improvement." Option 1 wasn't an improvement, it just made things worse for us.

Hmm, I mentioned science.(com? org?). Regardless, I'm not your research assistance. Look it up yourself.

But you're also a techie. You know how to use YouTube and stream on your TV. Hand this off to an 80 year old who barely knows how to use a computer and doesn't have a clue how to use a "smart" TV and you've lost a lot of your audience.

An improvement is an improvement, and your own claims support it. The fact-based article is not "editorial". Just because you don't like the facts doesn't mean they're "editorial." And again, any amount of improvement is still an improvement. This post is said to you by somebody with 15 solar panels on his roof. I'm not anti-environmentalism. I'm anti-stupidity. I'm anti-not thinking out the consequences and anti-not having a backup plan.

At higher altitudes, you're definitely cool about it either way.

Simultaneously, do we not remember the article from June 2023 on science.(com? org?) where they describe how cleaning up ship fuels ended up being a bad idea because the pollutants were actually causing clouds to form, cooling the environment? And how instead of rolling back the changes quickly, we decided to "wait and see what happens" until a solution is available? Wait and see what happens is too often a bad choice, and we're watching temperatures go up more rapidly now. There was no backup plan. There is a way forward, that is by putting salt into the ship exhaust, but that's still several years out. Meanwhile, we get warmer waiting for it.

I did one once and didn't have anything other than an antenna and Netflix. This was very early in the days of online streaming. That made for an interesting response on my part as while I gave the time, the "Channel" part was almost always "Netflix". No idea how they handled it on their end, but that wasn't my problem.

Show I don't watch will abandon Broadcast TV for streaming platform I don't use. I think it's safe to say that people over a certain age are never going to be watching the Oscars again because they won't know how to.

What exactly is a self-hosted runner? Or a runner for that matter in this context?

It's always a tricky problem. What is the "right" climate? 11,000 years ago was the end of a significant ice age. Strictly speaking, we're still in an ice age. Is there a "right" climate by our standards? Are we supposed to add ice so that places like North Africa can support more agriculture like it could during the Roman era? The only way we really get a degree of control over climate is living in a bubble of some sort on another body, such as the moon or Mars. Build in either of those places and you're free to deal with industrial waste with a lot fewer boundaries, at least until somebody comes along and says we need to restore the moon or Mars to its natural state. There's a big difference of course when you're dealing with a place with life an a place without it.

Yep. My 2013 Aston is a far better car as far as tech goes than my now totaled 2019 Land Rover Discovery. It's just new enough to have a good GPS system and can handle a classic iPod. Bluetooth is phone-only, but that's why the iPod interface and headphone jacks were invented. There are ways to upgrade the dash to support Android Auto and whatever Apple calls their product, but I'm happy with what I've got.

What you're describing is the same concept that the Fisker Karma and the Chevy Volt use. I love the concept. It's effectively a hybrid, but it works quite differently than a conventional hybrid. Now you've got me wondering how much a Karma costs, and wow are they cheap. Good luck finding parts for it, though.

Ford was/is trying to get completely out of the business of making cars because they weren't selling as well as their crossovers and pickups. In the process of discontinuing cars, they made one of the most incredible cars ever made: the Focus RS. I drive high performance vehicles. It's the second best car I've ever driven, after the Lotus Elise. The Elise is phenomenal around corners, but there's no trunk at all. You have room for one passenger and getting in an out of it is a major undertaking. While #2 to drive, to own? The Focus is the best. Incredible to drive and you've got room for 4 and space in the hatchback.

Put solar panels on your roof. My electric bill ranges from $0.00 to $16.03. The price of the loan on the solar panels is fixed, and with demand going up, my total bill combined is now less than my neighbors are paying. That wasn't supposed to happen for years. That's one of the things Biden got right, though nobody knew AI was going to be such an energy drain the time.