It is a paradox because there’s no objective, universal definition of tolerance. It’s literally impossible to be tolerant of everything. So you’re left with different forms of what intolerance people deem acceptable.

People make the same mistake about bigotry. It’s impossible not to be a bigot. You just don’t want to be the wrong kind of bigot. Now if only we could all agree on exactly what that was.

Take a look at how the median income in America compares to your country.

It’s a bit too positive to encompass all that is elitism.

It’s not fishy (at least not intentionally so). It’s a limitation of their database. It can only show 1000 comments. So it won’t find your very old posts when you sort by them.

So they’re not restoring comments. It’s just very difficult to find your old comments to actually delete them.

That’s just flat out wrong. Reprocessing is significantly more expensive at current uranium prices.

And so many states would throw up tons of roadblocks for reactors shipping their used fuel offsite to a central reprocessing facility.

No, not directly. You’d have to divert it and only irradiate it for short periods of time (30 days rather than the 18 to 24 month cycles that current plants have).

Proliferation isn’t a significant concern for reprocessing within the US. It’s primarily a concern for other non nuclear weapons countries that start it because they can then create nuclear weapons.

The US has no need to do that. They have more plutonium than they need for current weapons and it has a half life in the hundreds of thousands of years so it will last forever.

There’s been zero evidence of any updates. Even his editor claimed she hadn’t seen a single word of the book a couple years ago.

The issue is energy density. There’s a reason why boat tanks are ~6 times larger than a cars gas tank. That’s why they’re so expensive (plus batteries are much heavier).

What do you mean by this?

What I mean is that take a situation where someone was convicted of murder, but the reality is that was a false conviction and they were only guilty of manslaughter.

I shouldn’t have used the “innocent person” phrasing because that’s too low resolution for this discussion. You can’t always neatly put a person into innocent/guilty categories.

The Bolt EV or the Leaf are just that.

I should have made it clear I was primarily talking about the DCFC situation in the US. Europe is better off since they’re more population dense and their trips tend to be lower mileage.

Around town DCFC are irrelevant for most EV owners since they chsgre at some.

I don’t know if that’s an honest mistake or if you’re just making up things since there are no rest stops with DCFC. It’s against the law to do that on public rest stops.

As I stated, DCFC stations aren’t available everywhere. They’re often 100+ miles apart. So it doesn’t matter if you can make it 185 miles between subsequent charge stops with a comfortable buffer if your only DCFC options are at 100 miles at 200 miles. You’re stuck stopping at the 100 mile stop.

I’m not sure why you act as if all innocent people are completely innocent. It could be that they made mistakes and we’re careless and that was a part of what led them to being falsely convicted.

Literally zero incentive is an extremely high bar and certainly incorrect.

I understand wanting to ensure there’s a better incentive than currently exists, but giving them the death penalty for false death penalties is just a roundabout way of stopping the death penalty. So you may as well just do that directly.

That doesn’t make it a bullshit test. It makes it a different test. IMO range is more important than efficiency.

And if DCFC stations were everywhere, then I’d agree that would be more of a factor. But given that a 15 mile difference in range can be the difference between 100 miles between stops and 200 miles between stops, I’d still say range is more important than charge speed.

Doubly so since the highest range EVs are also among the highest charging speed EVs.

It seems you didn’t read the article at all.

There’s certainly debate about that. And that’s the exact discussion you want to see occuring as that’s what teaches critical thinking.

So yes, you should be discussing the beneficial aspects of slavery.

Nah, if Google maps says it takes 10 hours, then it takes 10 hours with stops unless you’re in the bottom 10% of traffic (such as if you’re a truck towing a trailer).

If you’re like most people going 5 to 10 mph over, then you’ll beat Google maps time by about 15 minutes per 2 hours of drive time without stopping.

The difference is that we don’t give the death penalty to somebody who accidentally does something wrong. And we especially don’t do that in such a deliberate drawn out process.