Nah, it's not politically noble, it's self protection. It's avoiding the change of political strife meaning they can't sell the cars they make.

Given what's been happening, it's probably a wise decision. I expect the stress between the US and China to get worse. I hope it stays at "economic warfare".

I think the justification is that gambling should be discouraged....not that I think that this works, or that they are at all consistent.

Ideally, it should be a hair space (because em dashes in web fonts are borderline illegible without it), but Slashdot does not support Unicode, and   gets silently swallowed by Slashdot's HTML parser. Besides, we all know that AP style is the one true style, and it demands space.

No, an en dash is used for numerical ranges and certain compound hyphentions, not for parentheticals.

We don't really know. I would bet that you are correct, and even give odds, but not long odds. Anything over 10:1 and I'd feel nervous.

IIUC, an em dash is a dash as wide as a capital "M".

Could you please make no em dashes the default so that the 1% of us who actually know how to use em dashes correctly — professional writers and language nerds and so on — don't keep getting accused of using ChatGPT?

Thanks,
The aforementioned

My guess is that the finance team got wind of it, and they're tightening their belt.

If they do end up being that two-faced and there's a Democrat-led Senate and House, that's how you get a 15-person Supreme Court.

Sorry, but even just high speeds are dangerous. They mean a slight twitch of your muscles and you're headed off the road faster than you can correct. It probably differs from person to person, but for me 70 mph was too fast, and I could tell that it was too fast. 65 was ok, but it was impossible to keep safe stopping distance. Fortunately, that *is* strongly affected by relative speeds, but you need to be able to handle incursions from this or that (say a deer).

If that happens frequently, then it's a serious problem that needs to be addressed. It doesn't matter if it's a really stupid mistake if a lot of people tend to make it.

They did. From the summary:

I don't know how to read this in any other way besides that Marriott contacted these people and told them that they no longer had reservations.

I also don't know how to read this in any other way besides that Marriott's cancellation of the contract with Sonder was directly responsible for this, which must either mean that the stay was at a Marriott hotel contracted through Sonder, or that it was at a third-party hotel and Marriott decided to not pay Sonder for the rest of that person's stay. In either case, Marriott is at least partially responsible, and in the latter case, may even be guilty of tortious interference with that person's stay.

iPhone is FREEEEEEEEE!

These are basically websites that are wrapped by an app. These developers can currently get most of what Apple provides without using Apple tech, and keep 97% of the profits. Why would they want to keep only 85% for such minimal benefits? For that matter, why are they providing an app when a website will do?

The U.S. rarely attacks or occupies those that didn't recently attack someone.

I mean, the most recent war with Iraq was something of a stretch, though there was at least some justification because of Iraq not holding up its end of international agreements regarding their nuclear program, which were made at least in part in response to Iraq attacking Kuwait just over a decade earlier. Otherwise, it's pretty much peacekeeping actions in response to U.N. decisions, helping out neighboring countries whose leaders ask, etc.

And when we say "keeps alternate parties off ballots", we don't mean "keeps alternate parties off ballots unless they can get at least n% of eligible voters to sign a petition. In the U.S., any party can get on the ballot, including those who just list one of the major party candidates as their candidate (yes, this is weird) just by getting enough signatures. If you can't get that many signatures, you were never going to win anyway, and all you can do is cause less desirable candidates to win by drawing votes from more desirable candidates.

Mind you, we've evolved into a two-party system that basically gives third parties little chance of actually winning any major election, which is, at least in part, a flaw in the way we do vote counting, but that doesn't prevent them from being on the ballot.