> I don't think Peter Higgs could have self funded CERN. I don't think a thousand Peter Higgs could have

Higgs didn't use the LHC to write the paper which won him the Nobel prize.

Additionally, I think it's worth considering that the availability of the money that built the LHC alleviates the drive to find different solutions.

As they say, "necessity is the mother of invention." I frequently think of the great pyramids and people being baffled on how they would build something of that scale without modern equipment. It's hard to get your mind to come up with novel ideas when it already knows that you'd use cranes, trucks, etc. to do it today.

> - Games. This is really getting better and better each year...but I regularly play Microsoft Flight Simulator and haven't even tried to get that running in Linux yet (anyone have good experiences getting this working?)

It's a major step up in power but the steam deck has really pushed the wine/proton environment to near parity. The only things that really don't work through it reliably is anti-cheat stuff that I really don't want on my machine anyway.

I can't speak for the experience with nvidia drivers but it's pretty amazing how far it's come.

> It's also an exception that proves the rule

That phrase doesn't refer to anomalies, it refers to signs that says "no parking between 5-10pm". It implies the rule that parking is allowed otherwise.

wikipedia:

"The exception that proves the rule" is a saying whose meaning is contested. Henry Watson Fowler's Modern English Usage identifies five ways in which the phrase has been used,[1] and each use makes some sort of reference to the role that a particular case or event takes in relation to a more general rule."

duckduckgo search assist: The phrase "the exception that proves the rule" originates from the Latin legal principle "exceptio probat regulam in casibus non exceptis," which means that the existence of an exception indicates that a general rule exists. This concept suggests that if an exception is noted, it implies there must be a rule that applies in other cases.

> identifies five ways in which the phrase has been used

Which has nothing to do with the meaning of the words in the phrase for a commonly misused phrase.

It highlights how everyone's first reaction is to assume incompetence. Not unlike what you're doing here.

You could add a short drive shaft behind the springs to put the motor on the car body. That'd give you some additional advantage of moving much of the brake weight off of the wheel as well.

Why can't they flag everything?

Cheap energy is what drives innovation.

You'd never have cheap solar if we didn't have cheap coal first.

The problems of today will be solved by more energy consumption (desalinization or carbon capture, for example), not less.

Innovation is "waste" until it creates something new.

> There are still organic ones available, which are less dangerous.

"Organic" as in certified 'Organic' or as in the class of molecules?

If the former then I'd love to see the classification requirements that make a qualifying chemical safer all the ones that aren't.

If the later, that's blatantly untrue

"Organic" as in "allowed in what is commonly called 'organic farming'". You can find the rather short list here: https://www.agdaily.com/technology/the-list-of-pesticides-ap...

Note that other countries may have different legislations. You are also free to eat DDT to prove that organic farming is not really safer.

Ripping a DVD is and was not a federal crime. The DMCA had carve outs for personal use and DeCSS was free speech (as argued and won by the EFF).

Using DeCSS to rip your own dvd was never illegal.

I'm not seeing personal use as one of the DCMA exemptions to prohibition against copyright protection circumvention: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-37/chapter-II/subchapter-...

The exemptions seem to be for pretty specific cases. Have you got a link to the EFF case?

A worldview built on reading comments from news aggregators.