It’s about the latter but it doesn’t have to work, just looks like you took action to solve a Daily Mail agenda…

Difficult but legally required by them, including establishing your bona fides.

Really? Like where are you thinking about?

Boomers have been in power for a long long time and the technology we are debating is as a result of their investment and prioritisation. So am not sure they are very afraid of it.

We can condemn Hamas and Israel in the same breath. We don’t have to support Israel as the agency to “remove” Hamas.

Could be that that is employee headcount and not including contractors.

Depends if they also evaporate.

Well, not to diss on giving to charity but two technical arguments against. One is, you are acting as an additional tax on the worker (the source of the surplus) and then redirecting that tax to charity. It’s fine but the elected government has democratically selected priorities that they can rarely fund so it is better to just give it to the treasury. And 2, just don’t collect this tax in the first place, allowing the worker to spend it on the local economy.

Agreed on the thrust of your comment but i also saw that a few changes to the nature of earth and everything changes. For example, a bit bigger and we could not use a rocket to leave orbit as it would exceed the power ratios. A bit closer to the sun etc.

And the fact that it took 4bn years.

The raw maths produces alot of planets but they still have to be Goldilocks