Fazoo

Real answer? Shut your PC down, pull the hard drive, and use a dock to pull your personal data to another PC. Only files you are 100% certain are clean. No apps or scripts.

Then wipe the machine without using an internet connection. Change all your passwords and reconfigure your home network. Then reflect on what you did in regards to risky online behavior and be more proactive in protecting your privacy and data.

If real, how they did it is irrelevant if you don't have forensic know-how. You need to now be proactive in preventing any further interference. If they can create a file on your desktop, they have access to the system and what is on it.

Quite the hot take. Make a claim, cherry pick one thing, and post a random YouTube video to back it.

Most of our tech comes from the military inventions of decades prior. Most of that from the US military and government. So if you think socialism would have brought GPS, cell phones, home computers, rocket technology, satellites, and more to the commercial market sooner... lol.

The entire factory industry, worldwide, uses the assembly line model invented by Ford, an American company. This system also brought prices down on cars, making them a staple of life rather than a luxury.

I won't disagree with the fact big pharma could do more, but not with the idea it would have more incentive under a socialist system.

Gotta keep Jack Dorsey relevant somehow.

Obvious bias is obvious. YPG owns the region because they killed ISIS for it. Assad should have thought about these consequences when he focused on securing the capital at the expense of Syria as a whole. Sure though, complain about them funding themselves by selling oil. US is only doing the same thing Russia is, backing a regional player.

Get yourself a heavy glass mug. Lift gains while you drink.

Saint Harambe, passing on his wisdom. RIP you fucking legend. This day drink's for you.

I honestly couldn't believe it when watching Al Jazeera this morning. It's like the explosion in Lebanon. I can't imagine the chaos of it all for the locals.

You can't wrap your head around it because you simply don't want to. Of course I didn't mention every single potential crop. I mentioned the three most widely grown, around the entire world. Corn, rice, and soy. Yes, others would do well, but building above these crops would never work on large agricultural areas. Why? Because you need machinery to harvest large grow ops before they spoil. Farmers would never afford the human labor required to match. It will work great on smaller scale farms, people using upwards of 25 acres. What does that achieve power wise though by comparison? Not enough power.

Pastures are an issue for two reasons. One, grass needs direct sunlight to properly grow. Two, animal agriculture is a major cause of carbon emissions. We need less pastureland, and covering it doesn't help. You could convert existing pastureland into a reactor site, saving existing nature from development.

You would still need to develop new land for larger arrays. Land use that could be minimized by maximizing the possible power output.

Because that was the discussion, the amount of energy produced by nuclear vs other clean means and the amount of area dedicated for each to produce the same.

There are very few ignorantly disagreeing with this easy to prove fact, you being one of them. I do understand scale of a country, and the space required to power it via reactors saves hundreds of thousands of acres when compared to solar and wind.

Go Google the required acreage for each and educate yourself. You're the one being ridiculous by attempting to call me out for "one single argument" and then continuing to prove you have no real concept of size and scale.

Compared to a hundred acres? Meaning the other 2,900 acres could be preserved in some form of natural state? That absolutely is a lot when you consider the energy needs of a modern country. The fact you're acting like that's not a valid argument just proves how ignorant you are.

Growing crops under a solar array does not justify your inability to comprehend land size/use. Corn? Fine, that works with indirect. Soy and rice do not though. So 2 of the 3 most widely grown crops would be hindered by that plan.

So instead of destroying major crops with the ridiculous idea of building thousands of acres of solar panels, or tens of thousands of acres of wind turbines, we should focus on the much smaller impact of nuclear energy.

But they're all using a discounted NordVPN thanks to Warographics.