I really do think coding using AI tools is a bit faster, at least it seems that way to me. As most of the morning but lengthy work can be done faster by AI.

But I am also pretty sure it's VERY easy to rapidly incur technical debt, especially if you are telling AI to review its own work. Yeah it will do some stuff but who is to say post review fixes it's really better?

More than ever I think the right approach to coding with AI is to build up carefully crafted frameworks that are solid (maybe use AI to help but review and tests very carefully) then allow AI to build on top of solid fundamental structures that you know are solid, and do not let the AI modify those - maybe let it ask for feature requests.

Amateur. It's more like:
*drops to knees* KHAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNN!

And that is the assumption you made. The article specifically mentions "affiliates, parents, or subsidiaries” accounts. The way I read it, if you owe Apple money, Apple is not asking Epic Game Store for the money. If you have multiple accounts, Apple is not limiting withdrawing from the main account. Banks have done this where overdrafts on checking gets pulled from savings or other accounts. I would assume if the amount owed exceeds money in all accounts, then Apple would use a third party debt collector.

Where in the world did you read that Apple "can arbitrarily make up a number"? The article says that IF a developer owes Apple money, Apple can pull the funds not from the developer's primary account but other accounts the developer might have. For example if a developer has a separate account for two apps and one of them is in the red, Apple can withdraw money from the other account.

If I read the article correctly, Apple will go after debt that a developer owes them by withdrawing from other accounts that developer might have. If the developer has "affiliates, parents, or subsidiaries" accounts, then Apple will get the money from them. How is that a debt collector again which is normally someone recovering debts for a third party?

I thought you had to somehow resurrect the ghosts of the murdered to get furies. Am I remembering my Roman mythology wrong?

And no one said any of that. In the world today, the current EUV machines are made by one company in the world. It is ASML in the Netherlands. The US nor Japan produces them, and both countries have a long history with making lithography machines. The problem was the cost of R&D and the specific strategies to make EUV was successful only for one company. Making EUV machines is not an easy task that someone can do in their garage this weekend.

Can China copy everything ASML did? Sure. The issue is that it will take them a while to do so as part of the difficulty with EUV is that only very specific companies make the parts as EUV is on the cutting edge of technology. And as long as China is willing to spend huge amounts of money so that their machines are never profitable, they can do that.

The issue is you have taken China's word they have actually accomplished what they said they did. Personally, I don't believe them until I have seen it. For example, China proclaimed a breakthrough when SMIC made the Kirin 9000 processor for the Huawei Mate 60 Pro in 2023. The chip was a 7nm chip which all the "naysayers" said China could never manufacture. Except it was made using DUV not EUV. No one ever said 7nm was not possible using DUV. The main reason EUV was used was the smaller size meant low yields as not to be profitable and practical if DUV was used.

So the claim that China has made 7nm chips was technically true.

Not to mention Kilngons!

Yeah, Zillow and others basically act like paywalls to make it harder to find out information about available real estate and force you to do everything through agents who try to steer you to properties that give them a bigger commission.

The absolute worst is searching for land, because most of those sites don't want to give you the parcel numbers, which make the information almost completely useless. With a parcel number and five minutes of GIS searching, I can tell you if it is worth my time, all without ever having to visit the property. Instead, they'd like you to have an agent try to convince you that the sheer cliff is buildable as long as you use an advanced septic system. ROFL.

I've never understood why MLS wasn't more open. It has always been going against consumers' best interest to keep it as closed as it is, IMO.

... spread over probably 24" x 48", or 8 square feet, for a total of 625 pounds per square foot.

Ignoring that the numbers above are probably less than half the static load limit, the static load limit is as low as it is because A. the raised floor has weight, and B. the raised floor likely has a much lower weight limit than the concrete slab under it.

Solution: Remove the raised floor.

Which means you can now run overhead cable trays above the height of your tallest employees. No need for the raised floors. Also, by ripping out the raised floors, you can have that extra height, so no need to rebuild the building.

Because people can't tip the racks up to get them through the doors, or lie them flat corner-to-corner in a freight elevator? This seems like a problem with movers not being creative enough when moving things, rather than a building problem.

This whole article reads like people looking for an excuse to spend more money and build monuments to themselves, rather than an actual problem. What am I missing?

The increase in fire rates is completely irrelevant for training, too. You can learn to shoot a rifle with any rifle. You'll need a little bit of training on how the mags load in different rifles and stuff, but not much. In terms of learning how to aim and stuff, kids can train on a single-shot rifle.

It's not obvious to me. I learned how to shoot rifles and handguns as a kid, and I've never had any kind of gun in my house other than a BB gun.

Governments at the time had a powder house that provided extra munitions and guns. Some militiamen at the time did have personal weapons in their homes. The minutemen were more trained than other militiamen, and presumably also screened for not being nuts. So yes, hand-picked elite soldiers all had weapons, but that's not an indication that everyone needs to — doubly so when you consider that the National Guard is the only remaining lawfully recognized militia in the U.S., and all others are markedly different from the militias at the time, which were organized by local governments, not by random people who like to shoot guns.

The whole point is that we have that, and it's called the National Guard.

Let's not forget that modern mass shootings still could not have happened without cartridged firearms. Let's not forget that there's a clear, direct correlation between the increase in assault rifle sales after that ban was overturned and the number of mass shooting deaths in the U.S. Let's not forget that mass shootings have been around since at least 1949, and probably longer — it's not a new phenomenon at all — and that the only thing that is clearly correlated with the number of mass shootings is the number of guns sold.

I'm not saying that we should get rid of guns, but blanketly saying that all gun laws are unconstitutional just isn't grounded in what the second amendment says, and burying our heads in the sand and ignoring the damage caused to our society by nutjobs getting guns isn't going to keep it from happening over and over.

Some common sense laws could cut the mass shooting to really close to zero, all without meaningfully preventing normal, sane people from owning firearms if they want to do so. Examples:

• Re-enacting a federal waiting period (with an exception made for people who have an active restraining order against someone else and can legitimately show a reason to need one immediately for self defense) can dramatically reduce gun suicides and heat-of-the-moment homicides. And while this probably won't reduce mass shootings much, it will reduce gun deaths.
• Safe storage laws can dramatically reduce access to guns by gangs and known criminals who would not pass a background check. They can also reduce access to guns by children, who should never be allowed to have access to a firearm without an adult present, because very few have the mental maturity to handle that responsibility.
• Mandatory government-funded pre-purchase and annual psych evaluations for anyone owning a firearm could massively reduce the rate of mass shootings by identifying people who might be unstable and ensuring that they get the therapy they need to not go postal, particularly if you combine it with free mental health counseling for anyone who wants it and make it easy for mental health professionals to report to police if they feel that a person may be a danger to themselves or others, and if the police then have a policy of confiscating any weapons that the person owns and not giving them back until they have gone through an adequate period of counseling and the health professional has lifted the firearm hold.
• Requiring all firearm sales to be tracked by serial number in a federal registry, and providing civil liability for the last registered owner when a firearm is used in a crime unless they can show that the firearm was stolen out of a certified gun safe can then make all of the previous regulations have the teeth needed to actually do their jobs.
• Requiring significant additional screening to own high-power rifles, semi-automatic and automatic rifles, large magazines, etc. would also likely fix the recent surge in mass shooting deaths. (It's not just that mass shootings are becoming more common; they're also becoming more deadly.)

And so on. None of those policies violate my understanding of what the second amendment says, because they don't prevent a typical person from owning the sorts of firearms that are commonly used by individuals who are not active military. They don't prevent people who are active military, reserve, or guard (militia) from owning the firearms needed to protect the country, and they don't meaningfully impede our national defense, nor our police.

From what I know digital signage displays are a lot more than consumer TVs. They will last forever, but the down side is they are not great to watch content with lots of motion.

I saw Google and Plus together and got momentarily excited. :-D

I think you're wrong. I think the U.S. government has too much incentive to bail them out again no matter how badly they tank.

But you're not wrong about Ford being the least likely to survive the next ten years without massive government bailouts. IMO, Ford has never made good cars by any reasonable standard, giving rise to jokes all the way back in the late 1980s of Ford standing for "Found On the Road Dead" or "Fell Off the Road Dead", and I've seen no evidence that they have gotten much better since.