The reply is missing the point. I've read your other replies. You're ordinarily incisive, so I will recap:

Prohibition is not a total, encompassing solution. It's a stopgap measure at best. To effect a lasting change to behavior, one needs must change the person's behavior. And the only one that can do that is the person. You can annoy them. You can fine them, lock them up. They will return to be behavior if that's all you do. It's my opinion this is why incarceration in the USA has such high recidivism - because the right wing sees treating the underlying causes as being "weak on crime". Yet per capita, the USA locks up more people than most dictatorships except El Salvador Cuba, Rwanda and Turkmenistan.
.
AGAIN, and that maybe good enough for the rest of society that is not experiencing the undesired behavior. It is not a "forever" solution. Smoking is a great example of that. Prohibiting it worked for society in the short term, but it was the change to culture (no ads, age restrictions, location prohibition, fines for the manufactures, cessation of crop support payments, addiction treatment, high tax) that has had the most lasting effect.

There is correlation of the jet stream winds with surface level winds. This can be deduced from Bernoulli's theorem and simple weather observations.
Burnoulli teaches us fluids (and gas behaves like a fluid) is entrained by higher velocity layers and the turbulence will entrain comparatively very large areas.
A glance at any aviation weather chart will show weather fronts react to the jet stream, thus lower level weather.

Consumers should have a choice of buy disposable tech with forever landlords, or equipment designed to be serviced and the ability to actually own what you pay for. But it doesn't matter what price one puts on "forever" devices when business demands a forever revenue stream, with the lowest possible ability of the consumer to say "no" to never ending fees.

An example is the automobile - they are getting more and more to the point where if you don't go to the dealer for repair, you've got a paperweight with a note you still have to pay off. Try that with a stamping press or a generator. Hell, they even tried tying maintenance to the OEM with locomotives! For those wondering here is the follow up on that.

Case in point for business controlling consumer choices - Sony paid out billions to remove consumer choice of HD-DVD over Blu-Ray by bribing production companies to release solely on Blu-Ray. There have been many instances throughout history of business using underhanded means to control consumer choices. See kingsford and the charcoal business, or Firestone and interurban railroads,or print press and e-books with Kindle. As long as the profits are not confiscated and devastating fines imposed, this will continue and the fines and campaign contributions simply factored in to the end price to you and me. While I don't fully agree with Louis Rossmann on all of his points, he does have many I do agree with. I'm thankful for people like Louis and you, and I encourage you to keep fighting this sort of abuse.

What one man can seal, another can unseal and reseal as well as the original was. Just takes the skill, material, and time. Given the usual quality of say, a Wal-Mart or strip mall cell phone shop, one might as well throw away the phone and just buy a new one and save time, money and aggravation. Good techs in anything are hard to come by because the pay usually sucks.

TL:DR
Used to work on down hole oil well measuring devices such as gyroscopic mappers, gamma ray, neutron, induction, acoustic and core samplers. Incorrectly sealing the tool (looks like a 10' long pipe with a wire harness on the top and a cap on the bottom or a connection harness inside a coupling for another tool) would result in that detector being exposed to +10,000 PSI of oil, saltwater, bentonite, and "schmutz". Since most of the detectors cost more than the price of three houses I was living in at the time, we were kinda encouraged to stick with the protocol for maintenance. From personal experience, I can swear under oath that I wouldn't trust the average strip mall tech to have swept the floor correctly. (Exceptions occur, so if the reader is one of them and is actually competent, kudos and don't flame me.)

Humans, as a group, seem incapable of learning damn near anything.
Banning tobacco doesn't stop smoking.
Banning drugs doesn't stop drug addiction.
Banning alcohol doesn't stop alcohol addiction.
Banning prostitution doesn't stop whore mongering.
Banning gambling won't stop gambling addiction.

For then N'th time folks, addicts can not be stopped by anything but the addict themselves. They have to want to seek change and they have to work damn hard doing it. Short of that, the only "solutions" are close incarceration, letting them die of the addiction or killing them for having it. One can ban the substance or activity, but the addiction is still there. And may be that's good enough for society that isn't afflicted with it, but never mistake it for a "cure".

Here is a list of unsolved physics problems unsuited to current mathematical modeling.

"I, at any rate, am convinced that [God] does not throw dice" Albert Einstein
“Not only does God play dice but... he sometimes throws them where they cannot be seen.” Stephen Hawking
"And they are loaded." - Me.

Personally, I'd rather we had a perfect model of something that wasn't an animal or a human to experiment on.

We don't.

Is it humane to know there is a cure for something, animal or human, and decide not to seek a cure? To let them suffer with it?

Setting a broken limb causes immense pain. Should we force people and animals to live with unset, unhealed broken bones? Some forms of cancer eat away at the body, also causing unimaginable pain with currently no hope for a cure. Yet many jurisdictions do not recognize the right of the person so suffering to choose to end their life. If it were a pet, most states allow for the owner to be prosecuted for not putting it down.

Who knows, maybe the moon really is green cheese?
Speculation is a wonderful tool but terrible master.

Science doesn't have morals. People do. I don't recall a recent instance where legitimate research caused pain in animals or humans simply to cause pain for no valid research purpose. Even removal of pain can be immoral - case in point is the coverup involving Fentanyl and Oxycontin's addiction properties, and the laws passed to protect the families that owned those drugs and promoted the falsehoods from being sued for their illegal and very immoral actions.

  I've read about many people suffering from what I would deem psychosis (and I'm not a mental health expert) doing so. Kristi Nome is an self admitted example of someone I believe is unbalanced. Others disagree with my assessment. Going back in history and risking a Godwin, Josef Mengele is another. Marquis de Sade, in Justine wrote eloquently on the "art" of torture and depravity.

Like many things, this is another where circumstances and intent differ by each case. There are no simple, always right answers, nor answers "everyone" agrees with. Even my own assessment is no unwavering guiding star. Tomorrow I may change my mind. That's what reasonably sane people do when presented with more information.

When I read that, I imagined a room full of people laughing their asses off. Remember that "Power companies don't want you to know" rubber band air conditioning ads that went on for months? Or the JingleBell robot dog? Or all the ED quack nostrum ads? Or the skid mark magnesium ad? Or Trump watches (did they ever come out with one of those 100K wonders?). Now, I did see one once about mining gold from tap water that seemed to have been pulled fairly quickly. I think that was YT. May have been elsewhere.

In my opinion, YouTube ads are more YouTube/Alphabet harassment to get people to pay a subscription than an honest effort to obtain ad revenue. All but a hand full seem to me to be appeals to the gullible and easily scammed. Then again, that is the same opinion I came to in 1996 when I quit watching tv or going to movies. I don't mind there are stupid people in the world, Ghu knows sometimes I qualify there, but I really don't like it when the assumption is that I'm so flipping stupid I'd fall for that spit. It's insulting.

Yeah, but is it Lithium 6 or 7? THAT is the question! (Press 7 for batteries, press 6 for thermonuclear bombs. (See: Castle Bravo Test)

Lithium is commonly given to those with bipolar or schizo-affective disorders. Those suffering from those disorders on average have a mortality 10 to 20 years sooner than others. While it may give insights, it's not without other causes of life issues. As Alzheimer's disease usually (though not exclusively) onsets at advanced age, a higher instance of early mortality may impact the study. I'm not enough of a statistician to know if that can be effectively filtered out and still give a useful observation but it's something to be aware of.

Hmm. Sounds like the first "taste" is free. Now, why does that ring a (warning) bell....

Which then makes it a "Third Party Record" and can therefore be accessed by government using the same process as cell phone Geo Fence Warrants; frequently en mass; frequently with the thinnest of probable cause. Like many ideas, the pure and stated objective is a worthy one, one that "we all agree" is for the good. Too frequently, others see that effort as an avenue to accomplish their objectives as well, that are not in line with the original objective. "Mission Creep" is as real in law as anywhere else.

There "should be" three places where you do not have to concern yourself with incrimination. Your spouse, your religious counselor if any, and your doctor. Unfortunately, we see law enforcement turning spouses against each other (Tell he what they did or we'll take your kids!), Your priest (Tell us their confession or we'll charge you as an accomplice!), and now your doctor (Tell us what they told you or lose your license and go to jail!). With the "Big Hammer" of law, LEO will always have avenues to extort others against you.

Obama did propose this. The reason it didn't happen? It was felt it concentrated too much information in places that could not or would not be effectively controlled, and thus would be abused. Recall please, NO WHERE in US history has law enforcement or information sharing not been abused. You should be able to recall what happened when DOGE did a data suck on Social Security records without understanding the unstructured use of metadata in the record itself (using an impossible birth date to signify they did not actually have a birth date.) You'd realize this yourself if you'd simply recall what the right wing reaction was to a national ID card or requiring a national firearm registry.

As to it being "Opt in" - it will be opt in like credit cards. Sure, you can do without it, but you will not be participating in society without it as others do.
I was able to go eight months without need to use a credit card in 1980. In 2020, I couldn't make it a whole day without someone requiring a credit card for something.

Seems ICE is fully complying with COVID mask mandates now. A little late, and "They're more like "guidelines" than actual rules!" (PotC) Never saw a group of supposedly grown men more afraid of a bit of cloth, nor so persistently confuse the utility of their use.

Now, did you know ICE is a socialist service? It's a government function, preforming a task for people, using money captured by the Government's authority to levy a tax. Same process provides highways, air ports, drug inspections, food safety, 911 emergency services, title recording of property, and sea ports, and in civilized countries, health care.

I'm happy you put that noun in quotes. It shows you're aware you are using the incorrect part of speech. Perhaps the three decades of pointing this out is finally making progress.

In closing, please contemplate my sig below, written by William Pitt. For extra credit, privately contemplate, compare and contrast what happened with Bob Menendez vs. George Santos or Senator Rick Scott.

Because power I don't use I'm not supposed to be charged for. However, AI and power companies seem to expect we subsidize their growth spurts, not those root causes of systemic sector use.

Besides, those that do not believe humans cause macro changes to climate and environment haven't noticed that there aren't any more passenger pigeons or vast herds of buffalo. Heck, even useful insects are getting hit. I remember going for drives in the country as a child and having to have a wire brush to get dead bugs out of the radiator. Went to check on some things in the country because I suspect I wasn't getting the full story from the hands, and didn't need the wire brush. No bugs. We don't build cars with Star Trek shields to push them away you know.

When I buy widgets, I pay a price. When Gary over there buys 10,000 times more than I do, Gary pays a price.
However, why do power companies expect me to pay to subsidize other's price?

When I get a rail shipment, I pay the railroad to put in a switch and a siding. And every 10 to 15 to 20 years, I have to pay to have it maintained.
When I get a truck shipment, the trucks pay a fuel taxes which goes to pay for their share of the road.
Why do power companies expect a general subsidy?

I think you're correct - the power companies are getting way too comfortable with their monopoly.
I'd like to see a discussion on SMR's (Small Nuclear Reactors) versus gas pebble bed reactors versus MHD (magnetohydrodynamic) generators. (I don't think material science is up to make a competitive MHD yet, but I've not looked in 20 years or so.)