missinglugnut

You're not making any sense. If things worked like you say, the industrial manufacturers would just put solar on their roofs, save a bunch of money, and that'd be the end of the story.

If rooftop solar power were so economically efficient, the manufacturing companies would get far more shareholder money lobbying for rooftop solar than utilities can make lobbying against it. But your conspiracy thinking doesn't account for this.

Heavy machinery uses dramatically more power than the roof space above it can produce. And you can't shut the factory down every time there is a cloud in the sky, so you need a utility hookup that can power the whole factory anyway.

The grid is the technically superior solution. That's why megacorps with capital and lobbying might keep willingly connecting to it.

I can't help but wonder if publishing this was a desperate but calculated play for attention. I bet it's their most shared and discussed article ever.

Genuine or not they abandoned their readers who genuinely wanted to learn.

Come on, some things just aren't worth reading. Political content masquerading as science is at the top of that list.

>Instead you doubled down on remaining ignorant. Not even that, but you think it's worth bragging about on the internet!

All that condescension to hide the fact that you haven't made a point. Stop insulting people and point to something in the magazine you think is worth reading. Or have you not read it either?

The company had a valuation of about $500million USD (converted from INR) before the incident. Now it's likely worthless, because of an incident that could have been prevented by hiring one competent person.

Moral hazard describes situations where an entity is incentivized to take undue risk. With an upside of saving a single Indian endineers salary and a downside of destroying the entire company, it's safe to say the market wasn't incentivizing this. They were just stupid.

Absolute statements like this are just nonsense. Companies really will undercut each other on price to get customers. How much this happens depends on how competitive the market is. And one of the ingredients of a competitive market is not having high compliance burdens making it hard on new entrants.

If any idiot with a chicken could enter the egg business, eggs would be cheaper and more plentiful, but also less safe. Cheap importers would take over and probably start faking expiration dates and making people sick, but golly it'd be cheap. And contrary to you claims, it would also cause the richest execs in the business to lose their bonuses while the sketchy importers took over on slim margins.

I don't want that, but come on, you gotta admit the cost tradeoff is real.

The privatized water companies were not the ones responsible for the Furnace Brook pollution.

Morgan Farms is burying waste on their property and failing to contain it while the EA (government regulators) are unwilling/unable to stop it.

One year of the data center's water use was equivalent to half a day of the city of Lincoln's water use.

These arguments about data center water use are so dumb they distract from actual water conservation efforts too.

In the economy of the 70s you could walk into a business with a high school diploma, ask for a job, and get offered enough pay relative to housing costs to save for a home.

Now you have to spend 4 years studying and go into debt to have a chance at that life. But aside from having a cash flow problem, you can't get caught doing anything a college admissions counselor or job recruiter doesn't like or the plan will fall apart. So don't break any laws, get filmed doing anything unsavory (and everyone has a recording device in their pocket), and expect to have gray hair before you get your feet under you financially--if that day ever comes.

Now regardless of who you blame for this economy (though I suggest you look at the age of the people in charge), it's striking how the only decent social safety nets in the US are for retirees. Baby boomers can get government healthcare, social security, along with more benefits/tax breaks at the state and local level. The young have to pay for their own educations, pay for their own healthcare, and then get taxed to pay for the older generations too.

One generation hollowed out the economy, voted to give benefits to themselves while cutting them for everyone else, and ran up debt at every level of government in the process. Now no one else can afford to live the life they did.

Expected damage(broke with pet) > Expected damage(broke and no pet).

When a person doesn't pay for damages, how much damage they did very much matters. Why is that hard for you to wrap your head around?

It's an insurance premium of sorts. They are statistically much more likely to have a problem, so they adjust they rent to make the deal a positive expected value again.

Urine soaking into a subfloor can easily cost more to repair than the security deposit, and recovering damages in court is hard and expensive in its own right (if the person even has money to take).

Not to mention, even when there's no apparent damage, a pet apartment can require extra cleaning to get rid of odors and dander.

It just makes sense for the landlord to price in a potential headache.

How many of those 64% had their accident because of phones/drugs/recklessness and claimed to be distracted instead? With all the liability and shame involved in fatal crashes there's absolutely no way people are going to honestly self report illegal behavior.

You're wrong!

[I'm sure you won't have any desire for me to explain my position and will regard this interaction positively.]

What do you want people to say? "Yay, the terrible law that threatened to make free computing illegal has an exemption for Linux. Now we only have to deal with unwanted mandatory age verification on all our non-linux devices. I'm so happy."