Xerox is another good example, the people running the thing had vested interests in photocopiers and thought all the stuff Xerox PARC was doing was at best a distraction from the photocopier business or at worst a threat to it.
Most of the areas where Russia is fighting are full of ethnic Russians and they literally asked for Russian peacekeepers in 2022 because Kiev kept attacking them.
Seems some still can't quite seem to grok the difference between ethnicity, language and nationality.
General Syrskyi for example current commander and chief of the Ukrainian armed forces is "ethnic Russian". His day job is overseeing the transformation of Russian invaders into fertilizer.
As for the Donbasssss rallying cry of every feller who can't be bothered to check basic facts there is help and at least some hope for redemption.
https://ukraine.un.org/sites/d...
https://web.archive.org/web/20...
And it's quite likely that Trump will soon be invading Canada to protect the Western provinces from Ottawa. I suspect he's already set that up with Carney, since it will give him the most valuable parts of the country at very little cost.
While ultimately Albert Hofmann is to blame for your remarks I happen to know the real reason for the pending invasion of Canada. Trump is jealous over Trudeau banging Katy Perry.
No one...has forced american consumers to buy ridiculously oversized SUVs and pickups for the last 2 decades.
Unfortunately, I think at least a *part* of it has indeed been the unintended consequences of Obama-era legislation.
From the 70's through the 90's, we had station wagons. They were the family car, along with the minivan. They got 20-30 MPG, and could fit between five and eight passengers, depending on model. In the 2000s, minivans and SUVs became a bit more popular, but the station wagon still existed.
Then, the MPG mandates came. Cars had to get a certain amount of MPG, irrespective of other factors (e.g. not MPG/passenger). A car that fit seven passengers simply couldn't physically make that possible. So, the station wagon died...and instead of getting 30MPG in a car, people got 15-20MPG in an SUV, because they were classed as 'trucks', which weren't required to meet those criteria.
So, anyone who would have *wanted* a smaller, car-like way of transporting larger amounts of people or things, were stuck getting an SUV or a minivan. The squeeze continued, because the sedans that *did* exist had ever-more-stringent MPG requirements placed on them, which tended to involve design changes that reduced cargo space in many cases.
Also, with more and more higher vehicles, driving a regular car means getting blinded at night with floodlights from cars at mirror-level right behind (I *always* have to turn my side mirrors down to the point of uselessness in order to avoid getting blinded by SUVs behind me), and the feeling (irrespective of accuracy) that an accident between a sedan and an SUV involves the SUV walking away with a fender replacement, and the sedan driver ending up in the morgue.
I remember a few years ago, going to California for the first time and taking note of what was driving with me on Interstate 5. California - tree-hugging, forest-fire-having, $7/gallon-gasoline California...3/4 of the vehicles within visible distance were SUVs. Really? *ALL* of them wanted an SUV purely as status symbols, and wouldn't have preferred a station wagon, or something like it, if they were both available and common enough that they felt safe in them? Don't get me wrong, I love getting 51MPG in my Elantra...but you can't tell me that the laws intended to push automakers to make that possible didn't end up putting at least *some* pressure on consumers.
Blaming tech companies for Russia's evasion of sanctions seems foolish. You'd have to prove that said companies conspired with the Russian Federation to evade sanctions.
Export controls don't work this way. There is no requirement for a conspiracy and you can be held liable for looking the other way or lack of care.
That it's a competitive system is the problem. The world advances through cooperation.
Not exactly true. The world largely advances by Natural selection. Survival of the fittest. Allocating scarce resources, such as money, to the projects and people who prove the most meritorious or effective or valuable usage of the resource. Of course Collaboration has a value, but it's largely involving or between researches who already passed the bar. You gotta have people reaching a certain level before a degree of collaboration becomes of value.
As nice as YouTube science content can be, shows like PBS Nova are still better because they had the budget to do better and the incentive to get it right.
And anyway, Presidents cant make laws.
US Solicitor General John Sauer disagrees.
In the oral arguments for Trump v Slaughter, on Monday, Sauer said this isn't true when Justice Kagan pushed him on it. She said that the Founders clearly intended to have a separation of powers, to which he basically said "Yeah, but with the caveat that they created the 'unitary executive'", by which he seemed to mean that they intended the president to be able to do pretty much anything.
Kagan responded with a nuanced argument about how we have long allowed Congress to delegate limited legislative and judicial functions to the executive branch in the way we allow Congress to delegate the power to create and evaluate federal rules to executive-branch agencies, but that that strategy rests on a "deal" that both limits the scope of said rulemaking and evaluative functions and isolates them to the designated agency. She said that breaking that isolation by allowing the president detailed control over those functions abrogated and invalidated the deal, unconstitutionally concentrating power in ways that were clearly not intended by the Founders.
Sauer disagreed. I'll stop describing the discussion here and invite you to listen to it. The discussion is both fascinating and very accessible, and the linked clip is less than seven minutes long.
The court seems poised to take Sauer's view, which I think is clearly wrong. If they do, it's going to come back and bite conservatives hard when we get an active liberal president, as we inevitably will someday if the Trump administration fails to end democracy in the US.
What's very sad is that we already went through all of this and learned these lessons 150 years ago. After 100 years of experience with a thoroughly-politicized executive branch, we passed the Pentleton Civil Service Reform act in 1883 specifically to insulate most civil servants from presidential interference. Various other laws have subsequently been passed to create protections for federal workers and to establish high-level positions that are explicitly protected from the president. SCOTUS seems bent on overturning all of that and returning us to the pre-Pendleton era.
Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it, and it's looking we're gonna repeat a lot of bad history before we re-learn those 19th-century lessons.
Should have asked AI to make the movie for you and keep the money for yourself.
An executive order is nothing more than a memo. It does not have the force of law. This is just as DOA as inane attempts to override the 14th amendment with an executive order.
This is why Elon's claim that Tesla was using photon counting to overcome the dynamic range limitations of camera only sensors was complete rubbish. Actual photon counting sensors are extremely tricky to do well.
But hey ho, Tesla stock goes up.
TRANSACTION CANCELLED - FARECARD RETURNED
