It's the only obvious answer.

Just because conservatives tend to trust authority more than actual demonstrable facts doesn't mean that reporting those demonstrable facts is a "leftest interpretation of the world."

Thoughts and volcanos and prayers and DC8s.

So does the boy scouts program indoctrinate kids that they should harass, belittle, and ostracize homosexuals, or does BSA only do that in the real world?

And we do. That doesn't mean we can't also do activities that do require screens. It isn't a zero-sum game.

I honestly think that balance is key. No, your kid shouldn't be in front of a screen all day every day, and TV and games are never a substitute for parental attention. Kids need socialization, kinesthetic learning, etc. However, the AAP says my 15mo daughter shouldn't get any screen time except for video calls until she's 18mo. I think that's a bit too far. We DO spend a few minutes a day with some learning apps, usually 10min or less. Because of it, she's starting to associate letters with the sounds they make, and she's starting to differentiate different numbers and letters. For her age, that is absolutely awesome. We use endless academy, khan academy kids, and as stupid as it sounds, purina makes a "cat fishing" game for cats which is super simple but seems to be helping our daughter build hand-eye coordination. There are probably a ton more simple things that would be helpful. So, I believe some amount of purposeful screen time used well can definitely benefit even very young children. But it should never be the "only" thing.

You're forgetting one thing in your example - if foreign steel goes up to $120, that means there is now a massive run for domestic steel. That means domestic steel prices skyrocket due to demand - this is basic supply/demand curve stuff from economics class. So, the price will rise to that of the foreign steel, or even higher. So, if you make finished steel goods, no matter what, you pay a much higher price, and domestic companies get screwed.

Because the current administration is run by freaking morons. The tariffs are against raw steel imports, not finished steel goods. So that means that US based companies that take raw steel and turn it into finished products now have to pay a much higher amount for raw materials. If you cut off foreign raw steel, now the price of domestic raw steel skyrockets due to demand. That's basic economics. Either way, those domestic companies face massive increases in costs and a loss of most of their margin. Oh, and because the tariffs only focus on raw steel, they now have to compete against international companies importing finished steel products who don't have to face those same tariffs. It's basically a policy assembled by people who have no freaking clue how economics work. But what else do you expect from a guy who literally destroys everything he touches, supported by people who don't understand that macroeconomics and microeconomics aren't the same thing.

This is 100% true. My grandfather was a gunsmith. He showed me how you can use a rubber band, a nail, and an old car antenna to make a small calibre zip gun. Like you said, guns have been made from the 1300s. And almost every failure prone part has been engineered away and combined into a modern bullet (wadding, spark, gunpowder, projectile). At this point, most of what a gun does is hold a bullet in place so the primer can get hit by some kind of pin, and point the projectile and gasses somewhere.

Thoughts and prayers.

I've been Agile exposed in so many different ways I can barely remember what the hell Agile really is supposed to be anymore. The worst thing that can happen to developers is "We're running or own take on Agile", because "our own take" means "negatively effective".

I've got colleagues who have been required to go to 10-14 hours of ceremonies each week because they don't need a scrum master and PMs murder them with meetings where they demand to be heard for hours for no reason other than the PMs have nothing better to do with their time. Hell, I have colleagues in that situation right now where I work.

I know of other teams that (and this continues to be a complete disaster) that have an open door policy on requirements. Work gets tabled all the time because the manager wants the internal customers to feel super special and any new requirement that comes along can out-prioritize something that is 99% complete. Makes the manager appear great (somehow) but the devs look like idiots because they never finish anything. Thankfully everyone I knew in this company has vacated...

My boss had been running a relatively successful Kanban but was forced to move to Agile Scrum recently due to some guy's decision up the ladder. As a team we've made the transition relatively effortlessly in the mind space. I mean, before I'd assign work to my team based on requirements that may not fit into sprints, and it worked very well, since I knew their skills very well. I could time manage the whole thing without a lot of thought and everyone was busting out good work left and right. The only difference now is I have to fit all that into sprints, which makes things harder. I'm not supposed to give out anything that would split an iteration, and therefore I either have to spent a lot of time cleverly breaking up projects so that work can continue, or give out 1-2 day assignments just to take up my developers' time.

As I'm the senior/lead/architect of the project this is definitely the wrong way to do things. All the above reduces MY time to develop from about 36 hours a week to 25-28 because I have to play scrumbag, as well as all the other rolls, and we've been saddled by a tools that doesn't' work so well. But I do a damned good job insulating my team from PMs and other managers (ours is really good at wasting time, too, but at least understands Agile).

It sorta could.

Cord-cutters (generally) have no choice. Internet can travel over cable lines (fastish), voice lines (meh), or satellite (barf). This "choice" drives the innovation that leads to a-hole decisions like this. So you have a-holes with decent internet, a-holes with bad internet, and a-holes with terrible internet.

Well, they may need to pull in some analysts. Because $2,667,328 is being spent over weeks. Perhaps a cool $3M now up front is a bargain.

Or they could invest in real storage/backup/BC/DR solutions for much, much less.

I wouldn't worry, given the current political climate in the US, our leadership has done everything it can to scare intelligent people away from our borders.

If you are going to pay someone 150k/year, do you want to bring them on board in a state where they are currently useless, and then have to spend 2-5 years training them to make them productive? What if you are looking for a candidate who is capable of being productive now if you are actively competing against another company?