Two possibilities:

1) Calibri is helpful: In which case Rubio is a shmuck, making it harder to read by undoing the advantage it offered over Times new Roman.

2) Calibri is not helpful: In which case it was a waste of time and money to change to Calibri but that also means it is a waste of time and money to change back so Rubio is a shmuck.

His stated reason "Decorum and professionalism" was untested opinion. There is nothing unprofessional about the font Calibri. Changing it because your opponent liked it is unprofessional and childish.

These jobs are the important entry-level jobs for immigrants, regardless of documentation status. Replacing them with robots is straight-up cruelty.

Agreed that AI (in general) is not a dead end, but any particular implementation of AI might be. OpenAI et al are betting billions that their approach will turn out to be the best one, but it really is a bet; there's not guarantee that tomorrow the next DeepSeek won't come out with a better algorithm that obsoletes all their investments.

Apple can always buy out whichever company they decide has what they want. It'll be pricey, but Apple has plenty of cash on hand.

These beggars are selling a product, though they do not know it.

That product is the approval of your own conscience. Are you the kind of person who can look at someone in need and ignore them?

It's also ingroup solidarity,you can leave comments with others who also gave money.

It's worthwhile to note that socialists despise charity. Government should do everything. That's why they got angry when MrBeast dug all those water wells in Africa. He made the governments look bad.

And never forget that socialism is for workers. It's a workers' paradise. It's not 'free money for lazy people who don't work," no matter how often Trump says that.

If you want to cooperate with law enforcement you can always CHOOSE to do it yourself.

The problem is RING and a lot of others do not really give you the choice - they make you cooperate with them, taking control of it - even against you. You get into a fight with your neighbor on your doorstep, they will get the footage and use it against you. Your daughter comes home drunk and the cops use the footage in her DWI case.

It's not about doing things illegal, it's about YOUR rights. The cops love to ignore them. You should not be forced to pay for the cops to illegally spy on you.

If you buy the camera and set up everything, you get all the benefits with no downsides and you pay less money.

Why will it be "winner takes most"? AI isn't like the Internet where there are network-effects that make first-mover status a huge advantage -- e.g. if I could write a better Facebook than Facebook today, it still wouldn't get used by anyone, since Facebook's advantage comes from its huge user base and my new platform wouldn't have one.

With AI, OTOH, anything the first-movers do, Apple can (eventually) copy and improve upon, a strategy they have used successfully many times in the past. Stepping back and letting others figure out what the works and doesn't work, on their own dime, seems like a good approach. Why burn money on what might be a dead-end, when others are happy to burn their own money for you?

Apple isn't doing nothing -- it's continuing to do the things that it has always done, like selling iPhones and computers and streaming services. Those things have always been profit centers for Apple, and they continue to be.

The other thing that it's doing correctly at this point is not losing its head and betting the farm on AI. Other companies would be wise to follow Apple's example.

The difference between the stock market and almost every other 'asset' is something called "Positive Sum Game". Gambling is a "Negative Sum Game." Much of the rest are "Zero Sum Game"

Negative Sum Games are games where someone takes money out of the system. Like a casino offering a poker game.

Zero Sum Game is when no one takes money out or puts money in. If you have a office bet and ten people put $50 bucks in and the winner takes 10*50= $500, that is a zero sum game.

None of the following are Positive Sum games: Pokemon, Art, Bitcoin, Commodities, etc.

The stock market however is a Positive Sum Game. Profitable businesses increase the value of the stock. Some use these profits to pay Dividends, others to buy assets or even buy out other companies. So the Net Sum of money in the system keeps going up.

This is a huge difference - the exact opposite of going to a casino where the casino always wins. If there was a casino that instead of taking a profit every day kept putting more money into the poker game, you would definitely play with them rather than real casinos.

That is why the Stock market is an Investment rather than gambling. The businesses put more money in than they take out.

Positive Sum Games are better than the other kind.

That is, while the law allows the US military to agree to vendor required repair contractors, the generals can still say no.

In fact, they have guns, and could theoretically take them out and threaten to shoot the salesmen as traitors to the country when they mention requiring repairs to be done by the vendor.

I would be surprised if they were even court martialled for shooting those salesmen.

But age based rules have three issues:

1) They are easier to get around than a ban of bad content.

2) They require anyone above the age to prove their age, thereby destroying their privacy which does far MORE damage than the supposed bad content. When it comes to censorship the government is always the bad guy, not the hero. Just look at the US currently.

3) They allow the bad content to continue to exist and affect the people they claim are old enough to deal with it. But people are not uniform. What some learn by 16, others do not until 18. Some never learn it. Worst of all, they never offer classes to teach people how to recognize the issues and deal with it. That would be far more effective than a temporary ban.

We need a Modern Home Economics class. It should talk about dealing with the police, dealing with taxes, dealing with the internet, how to recognize fraud/scams, how to recognize when a company is offering you a horrible deal (especially how your email/phone etc. is valuable and not a 'free' thing you give the company), sexual consent, how to ask someone out, basic medical care (do not remove the knife), and of course basic scientific method / logic.

Bitcoin does have some small intrinsic value. But it would be around the value of a ticket to the 1933 world's fair. Or an old newspaper with the headline "Dewey Wins".

Communism is not a workable system for more than Dunbar's number of people, and no country on earth uses it.
I really don't think it would work as an economic system, either, for the same reasons.

For groups smaller than Dunbar's number, that also have a charismatic leader, it can work quite well. But when that leader fails or retires, they tend to adopt a different system...or just fall apart.

That's not quite true. Occasionally some people in government do want to reduce the power of the government. For some reason they never end up making the decisions. This is because "power" is an instrumental goal that even an anarchist would desire if they wished to further their belief.

Every one dimensional metric oversimplifies things. But "fascism" is not well defined enough to use as a metric. And "statism" is the wrong term, if you're going to contrast against "individual freedom" the opposite pole should be "authoritarianism". E.g. many small communities traditionally didn't have any central government (i.e. no state), but they insisted on strict conformance to their rules via social pressure. (In that case the "authority" wouldn't be a person, but a set of social rules.)