Given that the Left still clings to discredited philosophies, I'm waiting for your point...

That's their business models. Period. Bid low, explain how it cannot be done the way you wanted it to be, quote the real bid halfway through.

My brother has been programming in, for pay, RPG continuously since 1976. He also works with Java, JavaScript, CL, the C universe, and Rust, plus most of the IBM universe needed to work with S/3x, AS/400, and Z series. Yes, he's a stud. He studied PDP/11 and VAX as he studied S/32, RPG, CL, and excelled in them.

He does stuff I can't pronounce. So it pleases me when he calls about the blinking lights on his home router.

You can find work in RPG, though it's mostly grunt work now.

The science of AI, Artificial Intelligence, is rapidly advancing. The "Intelligence" is NOT "Artificial".

The speed of advancement is partly because AI reduces company expenses.

> Why? Absolutely no idea

This isn't surprising to anybody who's studied the psychology of political science.

Those who identify as 'conservative' value maintenance much higher than those who identify as 'progressive'. You're more likely to see them in their driveway changing their oil and measuring their tire tread depth. It's just different kinds of people with different time-preference mindsets.

Note that with a limited budget maintenance spending is money that cannot be spent on immediate benefits.

You need to allocate some of the benefits money to upgrading the IT systems so there's less to hand out. "How could you possibly cut their benefits?" is the kind of misplaced empathy that undercuts the system that they feel is valuable.

Of course there's usually a Federal bailout in the wings for people who don't plan ahead so the incentive systems are all completely misaligned for good governance. Since the Lockdowns we've seen the weaponization of the Dollar through sanctions and tariffs that have pushed world oil markets to the Yuan and cross-border settlements in sovereign currency exchanges, so the Dollar is in freefall compared to commodities which means those bailouts are going to end very soon.

As this reckoning becomes too real to ignore the populations will move strongly to vote for candidates who seem to understand the value of maintenance.

Yeah, and Healthcare is 20% of GDP.

According to Keynesian economists, if we were all much healthier the economy would be worse off.

I'm not sure how much more evidence you need that the entire economic school is a bunch of self-styled money-priests making excuses for government spending.

Keynes did some really good early work but then he got caught diddling kids and after that the King's spending was all the best thing anybody could do.

An early version of "trust the experts".

So the code was written by people who aren't familiar with the idea of "fail-safe"?

I might have gone to school for software engineering but I never equated it with building a bridge at 4000' over a canyon. Those are different things.

But none of my classmates would have thought about building a stack that fails into random or dangerous conditions. We always built from the ground up and verified states as new functionality was added with test evaluation of the possible error states.

And those classes were in C++89 without the advantages of proper exception handling like Java or Python provide.

I think if I were in the market for a $5000 IoT mattress I'd want to see something like a UL label on it. I guess the hardware guys put in a thermal switch so the heating elements shut off at 110*F? Thank goodness a runaway fire wasn't a failure mode.

I wouldn't personally ever spend that kind of money on something like that but if I were rich and disabled maybe there would be use cases.

Quoting the story: "Human-only work is forecast to drop 27% over the next five years."

Robots will eventually be excellent for all of us. Most things we buy will cost less.

Maybe we will have 4-day or 3-day work weeks.

Humans will not be doing extremely boring jobs.

My oldest was born in 1999 and the hospital sent us home with a list of foods that we shouldn't introduce to our children until they were three years old. I remember this because both peanut butter and honey were on the list, and one of my favorite foods is peanut butter and honey sandwiches. I have six kids, and I got in trouble quite a bit over the years because I gave my infants bits of my sandwiches.

What can I say, they liked them...

It's a bit funny to me that I was actually right about that particular call. Most of the times that my wife and I disagreed about something I was definitely the one that was wrong.

Most new parents don't know anything about raising children, and even the worst parents are pretty motivated to do a good job. New mothers, in particular, are desperate for solid advice on what to do with their new child. My wife isn't keen on reading the instructions for any purchase that she makes ever. No matter what it is that she buys I am the one that has to read the instructions and teach her how the thing works. That was true with our children as well. However, she made me read every pamphlet that the hospital sent home with us when our babies were born dozens of times over. If she thought I was interpreting them incorrectly she would wait a bit, cross examine me again, and force me to show references. If one of those pamphlets would have said that the best way to insure that the child grew up healthy and strong would be to murder the father and sprinkle his blood over the baby by the light of a full moon then I probably wouldn't have survived the first full moon after my daughter was born.

Someone in the medical community decided that the best way to protect children was to keep them away from certain allergens, and they put that opinion into the pamphlets that get given out to new parents. I am sure that the people that came up with that strategy meant well, but in they theory was proven incorrect.

'because I don't have a billion dollars to blow tailoring propaganda' /. is free-ish.

"they would start to agree with me as I debunked all the points"

And you've described the Documentary Effect. We often believe and adhere to the documentarian's presentation, that being the only, or latest, set of facts (or viewpoints) we have to work with. Then we hear other points of view, other facts, and we change our minds. Rinse and repeat. At some point the more logical of us settle on an understanding.

You seem to prefer those arguments and facts that follow a particular worldview. Others disagree. This is human. It's the worldview that governs these sorts of discussions, and the beliefs of the adherents.

I'm trying to not close my arguments with a general 'you ignorant &*#$' ad hominem attack, declaring them to be uninformed, ignorant, or just evil.

Good for you. You try so hard to prove us not just wrong.

Great. More of that.

Actually, consider some unions that are the de facto employer of their members. Ponder that for a bit.

0) He persists in using the 'en%@)$tification' expletive, which is vulgar without improving comprehension or understanding, because he's vulgar.

1) He excuses his vulgarity because he is so righteous. Mostly he is. Then he goes off on something not so righteous, but not so often that, for me, I ignore him.

2) Then Cory spews this proclamation that business leaders (bosses in class warfare language) care only for their own gratification, and the heck with the rest. Partly correct, but he blames the perceived lowering of quality of service on this. Consider how AI is actually working. I know of one implementation that has replaced a previous 'knowledge base' solution, permitting customers to state their problem (copy and paste the error message) and get the on-point reference and solution in seconds. Saving them minutes reading the index of their downloaded documentation, or, forbid, searching the pdf to find the references. Improvement? Yes. Reduction in force due to automation? Yes. Opportunity to allocate resources to other opportunities? Yes. Cory, you are not infallible.

When he stops using obscenities to get attention, I'll pay more attention. In this case, I'll just offer a random rebuke. Which he will never see.

No, you know little about S-band comms, I suspect.

This sub-band, 2025-2110 MHz, is used by both federal and non-federal entities. While specified for earth-to-space communications, I suspect that Starshield is testing the impacts of space-to-space and/or space-to-earth comms, for any of several purposes.

The 2025-2110 MHz band is used worldwide by other entities, also. If they complain, there will be some more information out there, and it will be fun to see who wins. If this is more than a brief experiment or whatever.

S-band is an interesting and busy place.

If I were carrying, I would evaluate the situation:

0) are there nonlethal options?
1) is anyone else responding?
2) is lethal force a danger to bystanders?

Which is why I don't carry for now.