Just to give you some perspective. One hundred million dollars in 100 dollar bills would be a pallet stacked about 4 feet high. A semi trailer could hold about 56 of those pallets, or $5.6B. As of today, Forbes says Elon is worth $384B, which would be about 68.5 semi trailers full of $100 bills.

But I’m sure more would materially improve his life.

Sources:

Visualizing f a billion dollars

Forbes real-time billionaire list

I disagree with calling individualized pronouns pronouns, mostly because the whole idea of pronouns, like you said, is to replace a noun with a generic reference. As you also said, words shape our thoughts, but they also have meaning. All that said, I can’t think of a better way to reject the idea of pronouns without implicitly rejecting the person doing so, which I also don’t believe is acceptable. I’d be happier if a better way was found, but making me happy isn’t the goal of communication in general.

I’ve been watching this drama for a while and keeping my opinions to myself since I’m largely unaffected by this discussion, but your comments helped crystallize my opinions on this and come to a reasonable state. I still don’t like the idea of individualized pronouns, but I can’t see an option that both ignores them and still respects their users right to how they identify themselves (and I can’t see a way to write that sentence without at least ignoring the whole subject). So thank you for that insight.

“Hey, little guy, is an asteroid gonna kill us all?”

Cluck cluck!

Well, there were a lot of fundamental steps that had to be completed first, not least of which was a high pressure vessel. This all took a lot of materials science, advancement in seemingly unrelated fields, etc., etc. Not unlike fusion technology… The difference is we have 2000 years more advancement than they had when they invented the steam engine.

It was about 1800 years between the first steam engine and a practical steam engine. I’m sorry that one or two generations is too long for you.

That’s exactly what I said.

I’d agree that unnecessary contracts are subsidies but then that just pushes your point down the road a little bit. I’d say that maintaining the ISS isn’t unnecessary, for instance.

It’s a sandbox survival game. So, the first step is to survive to the point where you can start making choices, the next step is to figure out what you want your goals to be. Then, the hard part. How will you achieve those goals?

Given the context, I choose to believe smth means “shaking my tiny head”.

I don’t have a problem with them changing the theme. I have a huge problem with them not allowing me to change it back, especially when it serves no practical purpose (other than, “sign up for our Windows <insert version here> certification!”). Now, I have no right to require them to do it, but it doesn’t mean it isn’t a shitty move on their part, and don’t pretend it isn’t.

Even solids are mostly nothing. This is why neutron stars are so dense - there is a lot less nothing between the neutrons, largely due to gravity.

Here’s another way to think about it. A gas is like a bunch of balls bouncing around a room, hitting the walls and occasionally each other. A solid is like a ball pit, but the balls are vibrating. There is still a lot of bouncing, but most of themstay together.

That, and they confused “Window Manager” and OS. There were third-party apps to make Win8 look like Win7, don’t tell me they couldn’t have included the option in the OS.

WinXPSP3 was a mainstay for so long. Vista wasn’t going to take that crown.

There have been some recent advances on hydrogen production. I don’t think this (sorry for the MSN link) is the one I heard of, but is an interesting example where cheaper catalysts are improving the efficiency of hydrogen production.

Now, I don’t know if or when hydrogen will be more cost-effective than batteries, which are also experiencing massive advances. This is why I’m going to take the comment someone on Lemmy made about buying used EVs for the next little while - it’s cheaper, they’re lasting longer than predicted, and the advances lined up for the next few years are significant.

She could be Canadian. Keep your wits about you and watch for signs…

deleted by creator

The number of farmers I’ve heard talking about mixing diesel and fertilizer to remove stumps and boulders…

Honestly, Canada is a terrible target from a guerrilla warfare perspective. We have vast areas of emptiness that locals are familiar with but are dangerous if you don’t know how to survive there, many pocket communities that could easily hide insurgents and weaponry, lots of farming, which means lots of nitrates, a populace that can easily disappear into the American general population, and enough of an identity to not want to be absorbed by a different culture.

I don’t think we could stop America from invading and occupying, but we could make Vietnam look like a walk in the park. So, who’s up for another couple decades of occupation?

I wouldn’t call Canada’s work/life balance good, but it’s still better than America’s.

There are two American rocket projects in the works that can carry a significant payload to the moon. One is using existing parts in a new configuration. It had one successful launch and cost $4B ($2.5B in launch costs alone). One is building a largely new system and improving existing elements and is estimated to have cost less than $2B so far, although it hasn’t reached the moon yet. That said, they have done 7 tests, at least 3 with a full configuration. How is that not better than the other option?

Also, you are acting like there are no fundamental advances happening in space engineering. Sure, the physics is pretty well-known, but the engineering problem of landing and reusing stages/rockets commercially has only been done since the Falcon series, so I think it’s safe to assume the technology and associated product lines is still maturing.