Every major infrastructure project that involves tunneling or digging runs into massive cost overruns, so basing the number on a cost estimate is already fishy. 100x is probably overkill, but not absurdly so. US infrastructure averages 8-12x more than elsewhere in the world, and it’s getting worse. New York adding less than two miles of track to their subway still cost more than double the estimate. California is spending infinite money on a rail line that may never exist.

Would you rather spend $100 for a 5% chance of losing power for 4-8 hours per year, or spend $10,000 dollars for a .1% chance of losing power for a minimum of 2 days?

Companies don’t stop hiring, at least in tech. They can force out more expensive talent and hire in cheaper areas or get more junior talent. You could very well interview your potential replacement.

I think it should require some proof that there was mutual intent to prevent or end a pregnancy, but otherwise it seems reasonable.

Texting on my old stratosphere was so much better than the modern keyboards. I wouldn’t mind an updated version.