Absolutely untrue in the US. You need an FAA repairman card or your A&P license both of which allow you access to high paying jobs. The fact that you need the certificate makes this skilled by definition.

Revit is a pretty commonly used architectural tool now.

Did you actually read your "source"? The article claims a lot but offers no substantiation to many of the claims.

To get a townhome in the bay at ~2k a month is a complete outlier with respect to rent. I live in a similar COL area and the cheapest you could rent that kind of space is for ~3.5k monthly in the present market.

Charity.

The car argument is not good. Anyone can buy and operate a car immediately on private property without any interference from government in the US.

I've had exactly the opposite experience. They respond quickly to tell me that nothing will change and I need to live with it.

Bans are subsets of regulation, no?

Stratasys' J850 totally has this capability. Full color printing with variable durometer elastomers.

There have been at least 2 mass shootings in Germany since March a simple Google search reveals. 🤔

Well, it's mass shootings not mass killings. However, that's not really important in this discussion when you can point to the in March and this .

Aviation regulations are written in blood. There's a reason general aviation is stuck with technology developed in the 50s and 60s: innovating is so expensive from a compliance standpoint and production volume so low that new technologies enter that space at a glacial pace. A new Jet-A burning piston engine is only available in airframes that cost $1M+ and the cost of retrofitting in older airframes is prohibitive. If we weren't so restrictive on the regulations, capitalism would offer a solution at a vastly reduced price point. So, would you rather have less provably safe aircraft, leaded avgas, or the complete prohibition of aircraft that make up the vast majority of the GA population?

We aren't mind readers. If you think we are wrong, explain why. You can call an attempt at defining your poor communication a strawman, but it only shields your ideas from the test of debate.

That's no strawman. You just refuse to see that there is no universal way to decide upon value that fits everyone's notion of it. If both people in an exchange come away satisfied, did one exploit the other? How do you strictly define the excess value on each side of the transaction? Your idea of a profit-less society doesn't consider how we'd pragmatically exchange our labor to achieve that.

I think I should have said "optic" in place of "lens". The crystal is the portion that is being oscillated to divert the beam. It could be that this is exactly the same principle being used by the referenced experiment but with much higher powered acoustic equipment.

Doesn't an AOM typically have a lens?

Spoken like someone who has never had a surprise maintenance issue pop up unexpectedly that costs multiple times your monthly mortgage.