ephemeral_gibbon

Yeah I'm kinda with you. If you're becoming filthy rich off selling access to content others made then you're fair game. If you're just doing it for yourself / not profiting it's a very different ball game though

I think the current thing is quite likely an organic uprising. Things have been very very broken in Venezuela for a while now and the people there aren't happy. Lots of people have been fleeing to Colombia for a while now and there are solid signs the election results were made up.

Yeah, I'm learning on an old mini, which is a great car to learn on because they made basically the same car for 40 years and it's one of the most heavily produced cars of all time. I can buy every part for it for a reasonable price from one of 15 online retailers, about 5 of which are in Australia. However, if that wasn't the case it would be quite a bad thing to learn on because you'd just spend all your time chasing parts.

Something like that, an old Toyota or a bug would be a good car to learn on

For YouTube stuff, d3sshooter is pretty good. He's an older bloke that really knows his stuff and does detailed videos about how to do specific jobs on his cars (e.g. I followed his video when putting together the hubs for my mini). This is also a more expensive way to do it, but restoring an old car isn't a bad way to go. You'll learn a hell of a lot from it and they're a bit simpler and more approachable than a newer car

Over the past 5 years the monthly road deaths here in aus have been going up, because of the prevalence of those massive cars

Not mostly, mostly consumer preferences. You wouldn't be able to sell them and it'd just be wasteful

The example they gave (shooters fishers farmers) also has policies that better represent views in the regional communities than nationals. I don't really agree with them, but they're more honest and better represent what they claim to than the nationals.

Nuclear is a terrible fit for that though, it can't scale up and down generation quickly, which is what would be useful with renewable. Honestly we're better off for now trying to get to 95% renewables as quickly as possible for cheap, and filling the 5% with quickly scaling gas, and solve the last few percent a little more slowly but in a way that's economic (and therefore will realistically happen). Nuclear is just way too slow, and if you sunk the cost that it'd take to build out the nuclear we could easily have a 100% renewable grid a lot sooner than the 20+ years it'll take with nuclear

Or the gas companies he wants to bridge the gap...

The cost of the commissioning and decommissioning (+of course running and wast management) is enough to make it more expensive than renewables with enough storage and transmission though. Nuclear was a great idea 30 years ago. In Australia where we have incredibly good renewable resources it's a terrible idea today.

I think a lot of the pushing for nuclear now is just as a distraction to keep fossil fuels in the mix for as long as possible, so those politicians can get their cosy board positions on fossil fuel companies after they quit politics

In this case it's because if you raised them no-one would want to buy them. The egg laying breeds are a lot tougher and have a lot less meet than the ones bred for meat. They also cost more per amount of meat in the end.

The simple fact is that people don't want to buy that, so it'd just be wasteful to grow them out.

Ah yes, let's take the low life area and make it 0 life