"Amazon Future Engineer is a comprehensive childhood-to-career program aimed at increasing access to computer science education for students from underserved and underrepresented communities."

First saw something like this 30+ years ago - someone grabbed a list of publicly available userIDs from the company's email system and apparently either manually or using a keyboard macro simply tried multiple times to logon with an incorrect password to lock out the entire company's thousands of user and team IDs. The company used mainframe systems/databases with centralized passwords, so didn't take long at all (not even 30 minutes, IIRC) to get everyone back in business. One imagines that such a simple 'attack' - essentially the same as what the guy did some 30 years later in 2021 - would wreak a lot more havoc in today's world with its overwhelmingly-complicated intertwined security layers, which are further compounded by the need to get consensus from a number of parties - e.g., security, risk, compliance, governance, operations, legal - that it's safe to reopen things for business even after a fix is identified. It seems part of this guy's hefty sentence is likely attributable to businesses relying on systems and infrastructure and bureaucracy that are vulnerable to and unable to recover quickly from even trivial 'attacks' like this that leave systems and data untouched, no?

Of course, the correct way to do this is to pass a Federal Law regulating AI, and then using the supremacy clause of the Constitution to set aside State laws that conflict with it.

But, Trump has never been one to do things in the Constitutional way. He just things that EOs are "rule by decree" even if they're not.

What if a somewhat lanky fugitive broke into my car and glued the accelerator to the floor as a side quest on his mission to get the band back together and save the old Catholic school?

Don't count on help from the Supreme Court on this. Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. v. Busk, 574 U.S. 27 (2014), was a unanimous decision by the United States Supreme Court, ruling that time spent by workers waiting to undergo anti-employee theft security screenings is not "integral and indispensable" to their work, and thus not compensable under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
 
Jesse Busk was among several workers employed by the temp agency Integrity Staffing Solutions to work in Amazon.com's warehouse in Nevada to help package and fulfill orders. At the end of each day, they had to spend about 25 minutes waiting to undergo anti-theft security checks before leaving. Busk and his fellow workers sued their employer, claiming they were entitled to be paid for those 25 minutes under the Fair Labor Standards Act. They argued that the time waiting could have been reduced if more screeners were added, or shifts were staggered so workers did not have to wait for the checks at the same time. Furthermore, since the checks were made to prevent employee theft, they only benefited the employers and the customers, not the employees themselves.

Tell me you've never been a landlord, without telling me you've never been a landlord.

Landlords LOVE chargers. They attract higher-income renters with better credit ratings, especially if they're at the high end of power output. I installed at least one and sometimes two Autel 50A chargers at all 28 of my rental properties three years ago and have been steadily able to cycle out to higher-paying, lower credit risk tenants.

So, you won't even consider an EV because you insist on being the one who blocks your mailbox?

That makes sense.

You have to be careful talking to anti-union MAGAts. To them, "communism" isn't an economic system. It just means "any system of government, economics, or religion we don't like." It doesn't matter to them what China actually is. It only matters that it's not "freedom" or whatever it is MAGAts think they're supporting (because it definitely isn't freedom). Probably Jesus. China doesn't like Jesus, so therefore they're COMMUNISTS!