I'm sorry, are we really going to pretend long haul flights will become hydrogen in the near future? Has any airport begun building, or even thinking of, refueling infrastructure?

I would argue that your perspective is a narrow one and you need to change what info you are consuming. My personal take (if you have any interest):

1. Most of the people on this world are not rich enough to be part of daily traffic jams. They are just trying to survive and enjoy life with what they have.

2. Current resource competition is driven by profit seeking and not bourne out of necessity (i.e. we're not "competing" in the traditional sense, where countries at war are doing so to feed their people etc... At least, not yet.)

3. There is definitely more space and resources available for more people, if we learn to better distribute what we have - the how of this, while keeping everyone happy, is the billion dollar question.

4. You can choose to live in the jungle by yourself if you want, no one is (hopefully) forcing you to take part in working etc.

5. If you can, you should go travel more. If you can't, go volunteer some of your time to your community. It tends to clear my "the world is going to shit" thoughts. Sure, there's problems everywhere, and we should fight for the ones we feel are important, but there is also a lot of great things happening.

I'm sorry, are you saying women's rights were better in the 1700s or wars didn't happen? Or that people had less problems? Or that the ruling class shared power?

I don't mean to offend, but this is an insanely naive view of the world.

A lot less humans existed for a lesser period of time without electricity.

We used to burn oil and other fuels for lamps, raw wood for heat, raw sewerage was everywhere if not released untreated into waterways. All of this was hugely polluting and detrimental to health. Please don't kid yourself that there were better times in the 1700s.

The 5 year price graph is much nicer to view.

I can recommend Reuters, given it still has a little bit of sports and opinion, but I find it's good at providing neutral facts and sources it's knowledge from appropriate experts for its opinion pieces.

It only lacks in providing local level news, where I turn to my country's national broadcaster.

This is literally what taxation and subsidies are for.

While I understand the sentiment, such action doesn't match the long term goals of the bloc to unify the continent. Another solution needs to be found to ensure single bad actors cannot hold up actions which severely impact the remaining stakeholders - I have no idea how it could be done though.

Xoxo, Another useless armchair observer

Planet earth is not prepared for rapidly growing climate risks.

Everyone is a bit shit here (including whoever came up with that title...). No one "won" anything here.

DoE wanted to use "emergency" measures to survey miner's energy use, which is likely outside of the scope of the original intent of such powers (which appears to be why the judge granted a temporary restraining order?).

The Bitcoin miner's claim the data release would cause "irreparable harm to their business..." If that's not an admission of guilt, then I don't know what is.

...just mayyyyyybe it's beecause they sell the uniform supply contract and make a lot of money for their budget from it? Dunno.

This is not correct for devices being sold to the EU at least. Part of the amendment to the Radio Equipment Regulation outlines the exact standards for power delivery that must be used, and that interfaces which are capable of being charged @ > 15W must "ensure that any additional charging protocol allows for the full functionality of the USB Power Delivery...".

For data transfer, I don't see the point and future improvements to USB will come from industry in future.

The only way around this is with a wireless charging protocol, but manufacturers are moving away from that it appears.