Or maybe, they’re trying to make it taller the ship of Theseus way.

Ah, and you’re the author. That kind of changes the whole context here.

It doesn’t mean much, but have your upvote back.

They can do whatever they want. They’re still going to get undercut.

Honestly, as long as fossil fuels are more expensive nobody’s going to stop the transition, anyway.

Lobbyists having an argument is one thing - and inevitable, they can make up one no matter what - infighting is quite another.

Almost exclusively? No. Nuclear produces predictable energy and a lot of it in a small area, which is why things like data centers are being built on them. As another example, if you’re above the arctic circle renewables straight up aren’t a thing in the winter (unless you count geothermal, maybe).

Overall it’s still probably the better choice, just because nuclear is hard, but it’s not like it doesn’t have a few remaining drawbacks.

Nuclear plants are far from the only public hazard if he’s actually going to go into places and derail them personally.

I don’t use almond milk mostly for that reason. (Oat is also just better)

It’s not even actually called lib. The line just straight up isn’t in the image “transcribed”, and it’s from arglib import comment_arguments in the original code.

Yeah, I gave this one a downvote.

It’s kind of a funny thing to say, because as the tagline itself mentions demand isn’t (totally) fixed. It also doesn’t give the source of that exact statement, annoyingly.

What’s actually going to happen is that people some places are going to have scarcity and have to cut back or import more at a cost. Either gradually, the way it seems to be shaping up where I live, or suddenly, like whenever California’s aquifers finally bite it.

Well, and people will keep buying said things. Billionaires shouldn’t exist, and they’re easy to blame, but there’s not that many of them. They definitely aren’t personally eating that much meat, at least.

I’m going to say it just is misinformation, if that’s what “lib” is here.

Hmm. I, on the other hand, tend to write a lot more code than I probably should before I do debugging, so there’s plenty to go back through again.

Although this looks like it’s for a browser, and for all I know debuggers work completely differently in there.

^ This is the person I want to develop with. My goodness, can I produce some tasty, broken first-pass code you can go wild on.

I suppose that means capital gains tax is lower in your jurisdiction than normal income tax?

For what it’s worth, I’m poor as shit, and my investment account is there but pretty empty, haha.

That’s kind of the whole philosophy, though. The tests are the main way you understand what you’re doing, the working code is just an addition on top of that. Presumably, there’s a way to do that without repeating yourself - although I’m not turning up much on a quick look.

Well, yeah, but I was kind of hoping you’d explain why.

I don’t think there’s any weaseling here. Clinton wasn’t about to start a nuclear war over Ukraine, and very deliberately didn’t enter a treaty that said that. Diplomats are famous for arguing endlessly over exact choice of words, even.

Nobody ever claimed international law was strong and inviolable.

It doesn’t say the signatories will help, though, it just says they won’t hurt. To “respect” is a passive activity.

Is there something more specific in CSCE?

Yeah, Russia definitely broke their word here. I just don’t see anything that says the US has to intervene.