Well, you’re going to piss off the policyholders then. State Farm is a mutual insurance company. It’s owned by the policyholders. It’s essentially a non-profit, since profits go to reduce premiums or pay dividends to the policyholders.

The thing is, the company isn’t turning a profit. When what fills the cup doesn’t match the hole in the bottom, at some point the cup will be empty. California has mismanaged the wilderness areas and allowed development without concern for potential fire danger. Climate change, high fuel loads after decades of suppressing natural fires, improperly maintained electrical infrastructure, and a lack of “Fire Wise” education are all contributing to huge wildfires and high property loss rates.

If California were to seize every insurance company in the state, they would quickly be in the same predicament - needing to raise premiums to cover the losses.

The only real solution is to reduce the risk. That’s why the NFPA came up with local Fire Safe Councils. We educate the homeowners about how to make our homes resistant to wildfire damage. Using grant money, we reduce the fire danger by clearing hazardous undergrowth. We provide resources for homeowners, like chipping programs, matching funds for tree removal, and other assistance in maintaining defensible space. We have successfully lobbied for insurance discounts when homeowners complete risk reduction measures.

If you place a tea bag in a cup of water at 20C in a thermally isolated vacuum chamber, when the chamber pressure is reduced to or below the vapor pressure of water at 20C (about 17 torr, or 1/3 psi), it will begin to boil. The vapor produced will be at 20C and the water in the cup will be 20C and begin to decrease, because of latent heat of vaporization needed for the liquid/gas phase change. The water will continue to boil as long as the pressure is maintained at or below the vapor pressure of water at that temperature. Eventually, the water reaches 0C. Then it will stop boiling and begin to freeze as the latent heat of fusion provides the necessary heat to continue evaporation. When all the water has converted to ice, the vapor pressure is greatly reduced. The ice will sublime (go from solid to gas) still, but as that continues to cool the ice, the vapor pressure also drops. As the temperature drops, sublimation will slow until it is nearly zero. So you would end up with a tea bag encased in ice.

In your example, if you suddenly exposed to the cup and tea bag to the vacuum of space by rapidly venting the air, the water would explosively evaporate, shredding the tea bag. You’d be left with bits of tea leaves, an empty cup, and a lot of very fine ice crystals.

I see it as one possibility of many. Measures currently employed are limited because most countries are democratic, where politicians must appease the people to stay in office. China could implement one-child because they are a de-facto dictatorship.

I’ve tried it many ways. The most efficient method using a fan is to open the windows in a room on the leeward side of the house, then place a fan a few feet in front of the doorway, blowing air into the room. It’s more efficient because the impelled air will entrain surrounding air moving a greater volume through the doorway and out all the windows in that room. Then open windows in the farthest rooms to get a cross breeze.

Also look into an attic fan. They exhaust hot air from the attic, and it makes a world of difference in keeping your interior cool. Another trick is to mount shade cloth 6 inches away from the sunny walls of your home. It absorbs most of the solar radiation and keeps your walls cooler.

Logically, killing humans would be way down on the list of potential Global Warming solutions. We would have to exhaust all other methods first. Just banning private vehicles would save a few billion from extermination. Green energy tech and Nuclear power would save more. Vegetarian diets even more. Reducing organic waste, involuntary birth control, carbon sequestration - it’s a long list of better incremental solutions. They may be more costly than extermination, but they’re infinitely more ethical. It’s only logical if that’s the sole solution that ensures some of the population survives. We’re a long way from that condition.

It wasn’t any particular scientific discovery that weakened religion. It was the popularity of science fiction that did it. As Arthur C. Clarke put it, “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” People can now imagine how miracles are done without invoking anything supernatural. We might not have the tech to do it yet, but we have a pretty good idea of potential methods. That has placed a lot of “creator god” religions under pressure. Create life? Tech will eventually do it. Create a world? Sure, tech again. Given enough tech, a solar system can be spawned. Water into wine? We’re halfway there with Kool-Aid. We already have vimanas (those ancient Hindu flying vehicles). We call them airplanes or helicopters. We can destroy a whole city with a single weapon. So why should we worship a supreme being who supposedly did those things?

Assuming we can conquer poverty, religions that survive will be centered around improving the human condition. Worshipping dieties will eventually fall by the wayside. It will still be a long process. You can’t dispel faith with reason and facts. And people in poverty tend to embrace religion because it gives them comfort and hope that things will be better in the afterlife.

Animals were doing it long before humans even existed. Some birds will “bathe” in an ant nest because the formic acid excreted by the ants rids them of parasites. There’s even a word for it - zoopharmacognosy.

Long before recorded history, people knew what plants were helpful to treat or cure various maladies. Who knows what possessed the first human to chew on willow bark to relieve pain or reduce a fever? The earliest documentation of it was 400 BCE by Hippocrates, but it was probably common knowledge for much longer than that. The Chinese have been using various herbs to treat disease for at least 3000 years.

Every time I do a search, the bot usually provides enough info. The problem is that I don’t trust the bot because it’s been wrong before. So I still need to continue the search to find an authoritative answer.

That’s the problem with bots. If you trust their answers and they’re wrong, it can be a real problem. There was a story a while ago about an Air Canada customer service bot that was giving out bad info about bereavement travel. When a customer tried to get the promised refund, the airline admitted the advice was wrong, but claimed the bot was a separate legal entity, therefore they were not responsible for the advice it gave.

Pay-as-you-go phones work. A $15 (sometimes free) basic cellphone with a few minutes are all you need. Once the account is set up, the phone isn’t needed. I’ve made quite a few Google throw-away accounts this way. Just never lose your password and don’t turn on 2FA.

As far as Google tracking goes - you can firewall off all the Google servers if you dislike them, or use a router that connects through a VPN if you need that level of privacy.

An Android TV box doesn’t -need- Google once you’ve downloaded all the apps. But you do need it to keep all those apps up to date. I’m not sure what you gain with not having an account attached to the device. All those streaming services you mentioned require accounts. What’s one more?

Is this the new Russian assault vehicle?

Critical Thinking skills. Imagine a world where everyone is able to sus out the lies, separate fact from fiction, and not fall into pitfalls of illogical thinking.

Bigelow or Stash double bergamot Early Grey, or Hime Genmaicha. I’ve tried brands that cost more or less and always come back to these three.

Not sure it counts as tea, but I’ve also got a taste for Yerba Mate.

Biden needs to start putting up billboards with these Trump quotes, referring folks to his “trumpsucks.com” website, which now simply redirects to the “joebiden.com” website.

You would have been covered in ketchup.

Soon to be Former Millionaire Investment Banker Jonathan Kaye…FTFY

Yes, AI contribution is an area that needs legal clarification. I know you brought the question up for graphic arts, but the same thing is happening with music. I can use an AI tool to generate tracks, tweak them to my taste, then supply lyrics that are also at least partially generated by AI. But if I never admit that I used AI, it’s probably impossible to detect.

What makes this really interesting is that entertainment industry workers went on strike partly because of AI fears, yet would the resulting productions be copyrightable?

I’m a bit confused. If I use AI to generate an image, then modify it, can I claim copyright? And how would anyone know if I used an AI? I know there are telltale signs that computer algorithms were involved, so I guess the question is how much does the artist have to contribute before it’s no longer considered non-human art? Or does any use of AI tools invalidate the copyright?

Me: I wish I could stop paying taxes. Genie: poof Wish granted! Me: Woah…I don’t feel so good! Genie: It’s a fatal heart attack.

Home and garden center, hardware store, or Amazon.