GreyEyedGhost

Sabotage against an enemy in war is a long-held tradition, and can be a very effective tactic if it causes economic (or other) damage to their enemy. It will still cost less than rebuilding entire cities, but I guess that doesn't matter as much since it wasn't (scary hand gestures) sabotage.

I'll give you an upvote just for knowing what type of gem it was. So many South African diamond mine comments smh.

Assuming each view is a unique visitor, which is highly unlikely, it would only be 1% of our population. This is low penetrative. Now, how many of these visitors were passing on this misinformation to their creditors friends, that's another question.

The whole idea of nuclear ICBM warfare and MAD is that you are prepared to launch at least some of your missiles before your attack capability can be removed. So, to maintain MAD capability, at least some of your missiles have to be launch capable at any time in order to effectively respond to a first strike. Of course, that readiness level can be increased if the perceived threat is higher. What that means is that a response strike needs to be able to launch in less than 30 minutes. Two hours is very generous. The first strike advantage is that you can launch most of your missiles. The MAD doctrine assures that all victories on this stage are pyrrhic.

Yes, the US constitution requires that the president be at least 35 and a natural born citizen. There is more info here.

He also said almost all of the presidents, then links to a genealogy that lists less than half.

It is constitutionally impossible for Musk to become president.

Because the way to get rid of angry, desperate people is to kill them. A better way is to get rid of the desperation, which usually gives them something to lose, which gives them less desire to engage in actions that will lose them. That's why the War on Terror ended in a withdrawal, and not a victory. Sure, education and economic improvement isn't very fast, but some governments seem to be more than okay spending a couple decades doing something different.

No, this won't get rid of all of the terrorists, but how many of the wealthy, educated, married extremists with families are actually willing to risk their lives for their beliefs?

Yes, the Prius has a lot going for it. I personally would rather have a smaller EV instead, but that's not an easy thing to find right now, either.

This varies from region to region. My region is primarily hydro, in fact, about 0.1% is non-renewable. So, depending on where you live, electricity may be more thermally efficient than ICE. Also, you're ignoring the pollution control aspect. Even if your hybrid is more thermally efficient, it will still generate more pollution than any electrical generation method except perhaps coal, and I'm not certain about that. Your car's ICE engine also won't benefit from any of the upgrades to the electrical grid, while your electric car will. This also may not matter in some regions, since some places like America in general, don't expect to see a reduction in coal use for a decade or more. And yes, I'm aware that the electricity generation mix in America varies a great deal from region to region.

Like most questions that devolve to, "What would the world be like if people stopped doing bad things and just ?" pretty great. (The wish in this case is help each other with raising children.) Now if only we could get people to stop doing bad things.

The scientist Robert L. Forward discussed possible ways to handle this in his novel Rocheworld. The fiction part wasn't about the light sail, more the general AI, life extension tech, and the aliens.