How would it “know” not to do this. It can only provide you with a synthesis drawn from its training data. If your problem is within its training set, it’s not really research (which is what I assume “science” means). If its outside its set, you’re getting statistically generated noise.
the US has run deficits for years, so it's not reckless taxation in the form I think you mean. "Pay for its bills" would be a novel concept, involving undoing various "give money to rich people" tax cuts.
Nature or $GOD likes to laugh. For classical, macroscopic approximations Newtonian Mechanics still yields useful results. I'm sure somebody, in the spirit of Klingon translations of Shakespeare, has validated how well the Ptolemaic system (still) works...
Aircraft, remember, are aluminum balloons with wings. Hit something solid, particularly if filled with incompressible fluid, is a bad day. People f*ck up, people die.
Don’t forget the world needs LNG and the stuff made from petrochemicals such as fertilizer. They need to make chem plants as well as refineries to go with drilling new wells and run them harder. Get Venezuela up, but that’s probably O(years).
Is there enough copper and power to get those ev stations up in the us? Cuz now’s their chance.
There used to be conventions on not assinating leaders, or abducting them, commiting genocide, bombing water and hospitals, targeting journalists and birthday girls and boys, oh and destroying fuel infrastructure.
To be specific, it’s tied to good employment. Part-time and low-salary jobs don’t often (usually?) provide it. So trading a good tech jobs for “things to keep busy” loses the insurance. Unless you can afford cobra and that only lasts 18 months. At what tends to be 5x the price.
If there's more than copper cladding, and even if that's all there is, get those pennies out of people drawers and jars -> recycling. They're not really worth carrying about, yet they contains metals that might be useful elsewhere.
Stocks have to have some reward otherwise people won't play with them. They can be relatively stable-priced and return dividends or they can be increasing-price and ignore dividends. As is pointed out, the money and the gain has to come from somewhere. Dividends seem to reflect last year's money while price increases seems to reflect next year's money. Both, unfortunately, can be and sometimes are manipulated.
If pushed by any level of government it’s a first amendment violation. In all cases, favouring one religion (or group) over others is discrimination. By making it an example of coercion, it poisons belief making it a must do rather than a wants to do. The only good that might come from it is having an example of how not to handle interactions between groups.
You're talking about a country that has "In God We Trust" on its currency and compels all of its students to reference God in its daily Indoctrination Oath. These have been upheld by the Supreme Court.
If you’re referring to the Pledge of Allegiance, the original versions were a lot more neutral, the God part was a reactionary addition during the Red Scare, it even made believers uncomfortable at the time, and Jehovah’s Witnesses still don’t want to say it.
Some people might be trying their best to resist but on the whole there seems to be supine acceptance of what’s going down. I hope there actually is not obvious fighting but it would be better if they gave a hint from time to time.
One third loves the guy. One third doesn’t care so there remainder better get cracking.
reply