The particularly funny thing is, that most CNN content could itself be replaced by a somewhat simple shell script, and nobody would notice.

Kind of the same story for my HS science / maths teacher. We were all shooting the breeze one day after a test, talking about our futures and pay and stuff; and one of the other kids mentioned that he'd in no way want to be a teacher as they were chronically underpaid. Teach perked up and joined the conversation, as a 20 year veteran he was making 70k and had a solid two months a year off, a good pension and benefits. He was not in a place as expensive as SF.
Now he did say the first few years of his career were lean, but the key was continuing education and getting various certifications and the corresponding pay bumps which came along with it. He took several vacations a year, had a boat and an RV and a nice house and just finished sending his last kid to college. He told us himself that the idea teachers were poorly paid was a myth and explained he wouldn't have done anything different for a career. Kind of changed our minds about things. This was in 1999.

It's not that you're interested in the ad.
It's that you're statistically interested in the media. Suppose there's a spot in a video which a lot of people re-watch. That's where they're going to shove the most annoying stupid ad possible, and some people will probably click it out of anger and frustration. Winning!

It's a 1920s gangster culture meme. When the mob boss said to 86 someone it meant to take them 8 miles out of town and put them 6 feet under, handy that it also rhymes with nix which was also used in the same context. At some point the military started to use it in their lingo in the general sense of to get rid of something, restaurants and bars started to use it to mean to eject a patron or refuse service.

And that's exactly the point: to exfiltrate as much personal information from the victims brain as possible and use it for advertising and other nefarious purposes.

I simply paraphrased what the GP said. If you have an issue with their idea, it should be addressed to them--I do not claim or endorse it.
FWIW, I think it's rather silly, even though it does describe the current situation rather accurately: through Medicare and Medicaid the US taxpayer, through being unable to negotiate fair market prices has long been exploited by private corporate interests--and that's before one considers that this industry also benefits from large governmental subsidies at every stage of R from university grants on up.
I do not think it's fair to compare what they might be selling drugs in Africa or Romania to what a U.S. citizen pays. As you've said, that might be closer to what the market will bear in those locations--but it may be worth examining what other developed countries are paying, and if we are paying significantly more, it would be prudent to ask ourselves why.
Surely it wouldn't have anything to do with the pharmaceutical industry being a major contributor to political campaigns, or single-handedly keeping major news outlets afloat through advertising contracts.

GP also took issue with what Tesla charges in China as compared to what they charge in the USA, all while ignoring that Tesla China has a gigafactory and benefits from the economies of scale and cheaper labor which is present in that market. It would be silly to expect that a Tesla in China would be anything than drastically less expensive than one built in USA, as that's the very argument all other corpos use for producing everything there.

So what you're saying is you acknowledge the American people are directly subsidizing the rest of the worlds medicine needs through paying an average of 3X or more for the same product, and that this is happening via a money conduit established by unaccountable big pharmaceutical companies (with all of their well known philanthropical tendencies), and that this process should continue?

Huh?

Being a tenured professor does not preclude one from being wrong or being a deeply flawed individual with an agenda. I know a tenured professor who claims/d to be the reincarnation of Socrates to their students, by way of example.
When you have ONE professor who makes an extraordinary claim based on spurious evidence, it should be a signal to as skeptical as their claims are extraordinary.
Not that I know enough about this particular person to comment beyond that, but it does appear they have a history of selling the story differently depending on their audience, which is a sign of duplicity.

Yeah, but I imagine the vast majority of these scooters are two-stroke or 4 stroke with zero emissions considerations, or are so poorly maintained that even if they were clean burning when new, have long since stopped being clean. OP's modern 1500cc scoot-scoot may consume more fuel but undoubtedly produces a tiny fraction of smog-contributing emissions compared to most scooters on the road in India.

Do you think it's at all reasonable for the installed unit cost of NEVI funded chargers to be $3.9 million per installed charger, (currently awarded funds divided by installed units), while a Tesla supercharger, by way of example, runs around $175k installed?

The difference is the Tesla charger will go into the black after a year if it's reasonably well utilized, and it will start paying for its eventual replacement and maintenance (and actually produce income) while you're still paying for the NEVI charger for another 15 years. After a while one might wonder where this 22x multiple in cost actually goes.

One can say a lot of negative things about China, but at least they are reasonably efficient with their funds, and when something better comes along the way, they tend to pivot and go with the better approach.

900 miles is probably overkill, but there are areas in the country where you'd better treat the half tank mark as empty, even with a gas car. Those places tend not have chargers. Factor in reduced performance in hot and cold in an EV, you'd do well to treat 75% as empty in those places.

It is in fact something the government has funded, and quite extensively, and of course the result is just more of the usual gift

Hey why not? Everything is digital, including price tags at the store. An entire stores worth of price tags can be updated every second, wirelessly as if by magic. No need to haul around a wheelbarrow full of paper to buy a loaf of bread, when you have a wheelbarrows worth of digits in your pocket. The only problem will be figuring out how to display increasingly exponential prices in a way laypeople will understand!

Yeah, the website for the program is not much more illuminating. Evidently it's a sort of database cache which resides in RAM?

I don't know--it's kind of like splitting vaguely defined hairs. Each program hit significant benchmarks around similar dates.