Miss Universe...you mean the show that Trump leveraged to become best friends with Putin? You're holding up that show as an example of a "success"?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/miss-universe-in-moscow-how-trumps-beauty-contest-spawned-a-business-deal-with-russians-and-a-bond-with-putin_n_5aa14c8de4b0e9381c164540

It was co-owned by NBS most of the time Trump was an investor.

Air New Zealand is often rated as the safest airline in the world. They are 51% owned by the New Zealand government.

Etihad Airways also has a very strong safety record, they are majority owned by Abu Dahbi.

The change in culture at Boeing away from engineering and caring about safety and product quality, toward making a buck at all costs has been extensively documented. Even the FAA who was once best friends with Boeing, is calling Boeing's safety culture "inadequate" and "confusing." https://duckduckgo.com/?q=boei...

Unless you are paying $1.2 million for that college degree, then no, there is still a huge earnings premium for earning a college degree (or $800,000 vs associate's degree). This finding is persistent and consistent and the gap has grown in recent years (see, for example: https://www.forbes.com/sites/m...).

There's absolutely nothing wrong with going into the trades and working for a living. The work itself can also be really interesting and fun. But the big money in the trades comes when you own an operate your own business...and to operate a business requires some expertise...which might be developed by learning from those who have done it...at college.

Having a college degree also opens up more promotional opportunities in the trades. Want to be a fire chief or a fire captain, or a fire inspector? College degree.

Save money in college by going to a public institution, live frugally, work when you can, and get done in 4 years or fewer. Most students who do this graduate with less than $25k in debt, which is easily paid off with commitment in 3-5 years.

Especially since it's basically a whole lot of nothing. One rock to the next, it's pretty much all the same on the moon.

Haha - this is Slashdot, where no one reads the articles (including the editors)!

I'm no Apple fanboy. But I'm pointing out that it can be done, and done well, without advertising. We don't have to accept advertising in every facet of our lives, with our eyeballs and ears sold to the highest bidder.

I am more than happy to pay for products and services that let me (and especially my children) avoid advertising. And I try my best to avoid companies (Google, Meta, etc. etc. etc.) that make collecting and selling my data to shovel more ads down my throat as their business model.

Until the police go right up to the ISS, knock on their door, and give them a ticket for littering.

is investing in Google / Nest products? A company that makes its profit from selling advertising?

I see zero ads on my Apple TV 4k. Zero. (I do see promotions for Arcade games and Apple TV shows when I hover over those apps, but since I subscribe to both those are not advertisements per se and you can easily avoid them by not hovering over those apps.)

There's also the statistical fallacy: the notion that because something *could* exist, therefore we should assume that it does.

Specifically in this case, a highly intelligent being *could* create an extremely-realistic simulation of life. But the amount of energy, cost, time, complexity, etc. limit the number of simulations that reasonably could be created. So assuming that billions and billions of simulations would be created (just because they could) is a fallacy, and hence the idea that therefore our 'likelihood' of being a simulation is large should also be rejected.

It has resulted in the tyranny of the minority...and don't forget a major civil war... Many current laws are opposed by a majority of people (even when you poll only voters this is true). Take, for example, current laws on:
-Abortion
-Marijuana
-Healthcare

To name a few...on all of those issues public polling shows popular opinion is in contrast to the current laws. It's no way to effectively govern.

Except that when Trump won in 2016, he had fewer overall votes than Clinton. If he wins in 2024, it will again be because of electoral college math rather than by winning the popular vote.

A tiny proportion of voters showed up for the Republican primaries, just 14% of Republican voters in Iowa, for example.

So we have a Republican candidate selected by a tiny fraction of the members of that party, who will lose the popular vote, who still has a very good chance of becoming president. That hardly seems like the "leader we choose."

If they are like most organizations, their DEI policy is just a bunch of words with no actual actions. Anyone blaming DEI is just a troll.

If you believe someone is truly unfit to serve as a licensed engineer in Washington, then you can file a complaint with the Board of Registration (https://brpels.wa.gov/). Otherwise, STFU.

Another day another grift...

I'm going to be super-pissed if any of the mutual funds I own "invest" in this bomb.

Unfortunately there's no way individual investors are able to buy enough shares to make this valuation. There's got to be institutional investors who are participating. Where can we find the list?

I'm positive the reason they are participating isn't to make money - it's to buy influence (illegally?) with a possible future president. ("Wanna meet with the president? How many shares of Truth Social do you own?") The political system in the US is so messed up.

And this is why the Hertz plan failed - lack of systems thinking. You can't just throw 100,000 EVs into their standard system and expect it to work. They need to invest in training, chargers, better information for drivers, guidance when selecting a car, etc. etc. Just throwing a bunch of EVs into a system designed for ICE won't (and didn't) work.