Because a law passed by Congress actually *requires* what you are calling "the administrative state" to draft those regulations. The executive branch can't regulate something just because it thinks doing that would be a good idea. There has to be a law directing the executive branch to draft such a regulation.

Now if you actually look in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), you will see that each and every regulation in the CFR cites a *statutory authority* -- that is to say a law passed by Congress which compels the executive branch to draft a regulation about such an such a thing. For example 40 CFR Part 50, a regulation written by the "administrative state", cites 42 USC 7401 a statute passed by Congress.

Note that I say the statutes "require" and "compel", not "empower" and "enable". That's bcause the executive branch has no choice in the matter. It *must* issue a regulation if so directed by statute, even if it disagrees with that statute. This is why regulations don't just disappear when an anti-regulation president gets elected. An administration can tweak regulations to be more favorable to business, but if they go too far in undermining the intent of the statute they'll get sued for non-enforcement of the law (e.g., this).

So if you think an adminsitration has overstepped its statutory authority with a regulation, and you have standing, you can sue to have the regulation amended. But if you fail in your suit, you won't be able to fix it by electing a President who agrees with you. You need a Congress which will repeal the statory authority for the regulation.

If your information on this stuff from political news channels, you can be forgiven for thinking government bureaucrats just make up regulations on their own initiative, but it just doesn't work that way.

The idea that poor folks are the backbone of Trump's base is a myth. In 2016 Clinton won the under $50k income vote by 12% and tied with Trump in the over $100k income group. Trump notched a modest 3% margin of victory in the $50k-$100k group.

The actual backbone of Trump's base is white people without a college degree who are nonetheless doing fairly well for themselves. This is particularly influential demographic in rural states, which have outsize representation in the Electoral College.

Be that one person who figures out how to do stuff in your head.

Imagine what that feeling of power!

Could we not.

Fucking linear data feed of mouth-flappy-noises is for business management types who like to preen.

Dang it; wrong tab.

it's Apple Car down to chihuahua size bot.

Get the Richard Scarry design team on the phone, STAT!

https://www.richardscarry.com/...

I've been out of IT for many years now, but one question I always have about these ransom scenarios is this: wouldn't advanced journaliing filesystems make recovery from an attack much easier, particularly filesystems where you can mount a shapshot? You could just start serving a past snapshot then make any updated files available as you clear them.

Back in the day I had customers who had incompetent DBAs bork their databases with bad SQL DML and DDL. Where the customer was using Oracle it was pretty easy to walk that stuff back because under the covers Oracle has been making heavy use of COW in their database storage. This allowed me to selectively walk back certain sets of problematic transactions. I could roll back just the transactions made by a certain user on a certain day that involved particular operations or database objects. You didn't have to figure out how to undo the individual effects of the bad transactions, you just waved your magic wand and it was as if those transactions never happened.

There must be some reason people aren't using file systems with COW and efficient snapshotting for general file service, because of on the face of it this seems like an obvious solution to the problem.

It's both easing of the accellerator and using the brakes to scrub off speed, with precise performance altered by the drive mode.

In this case the reasoning is somewhat circular. *If* there are many simulated worlds just like ours and there is only one real world, then it's more probable that our world is simulated than it is real. That's necessarily true, because it's a tautology. The truth of the statement as a whole tells you nothing about the world we actually live in.

As usual, tech bro hype has taken some impressive (to laymen) demos and spun them into a scenario that is far beyond was is demonstrably possible. Sure we can have the comptuer draw pretty pictures, but we actually can't model the world we live in very well. No computer model can tell you the price of Apple stock at the close of business tommorow or the temperature at 2PM in the afternoon a year from now. You can't model a fusion reactor sell enough to get to the point of building a working power station, you have to build many physical experiments to validate your model results. As the statistician George Box famously noted: all models are false; some models are useful.

As for faith, it has its place in science. You do an experiment because you feel confident it's going to tell you something; you usually have a pretty good idea of what you want to happen. That feeling of confidence is important in directing your efforts, but it carries no weight in arguments about results. Faith is only a "sin" (Greek *hamartia* -- to miss the mark) when you demand others share it.

There will come a time when the rest of the developed world realizes the privileged folks who keep pushing EVs were too smug to realize that 80% of the world won't be able to use EVs because of shit electrical grids, and in fact most of the developed world won't have the energy infrastructure required for everyone to use them, including the less advantage (average) folks who can't afford them, a time when it is realized EVs won't save us. And by then because they have been trying to bury workable solutions we will all be fucked and doomed to extinction because they worked so hard to support people like Musk who is cynically playing this to be a billionaire, and we've run out of time to find actual solutions. Musk wants to go to Mars. Why would he actually care about Earth. The rest of the world that can't support EVs won't stop using ICEs until there is a solution that works for them.

Everyone should know that the greatest fast increase in the general IQ of people in the world was when salt was iodized, thus preventing the main cause of cretinism. Lately we are seeing this silly rise in 'sea salt' (all NaCl we eat has been in a sea at some point), 'kosher salt", "pink salt", etc. with the big marketing point of not being iodized. This has been going on for a couple decades. I can only think that the popularity of shit B movies with characters like King Kong, Godzilla, and comic book characters must be because of diminishing intelligence. This is one of the few things that does correlate with the rise a shit movies. How I wish for the return of movies with human characters, human relatable stories and character development, and actual plots in a human based world.

For most people some of the time, and for just about everyone some of the time, modern automatic transmissions will perform better than they would with an ICE vehicle. But no matter how good any automatic transmission is, the one thing it will never be able to do is read your mind about what you *intend* to do next. So there will always be situations with an ICE vehicle where you'd rather have a manual or semi-automatic than an automatic.

That doesn't apply to electric motors, which produce nearly peak torque at 0 RPM and then over a wide range of RPMs; so you never have to match the motor's RPMs to what you want to do next. There are corner cases, like towing an extremely heavy load or traveling at extremely high speeds outside the motor's very wide power band, where you'd want to have different gear ratios. There are various ways for engineers to address these cases, but if they chose to give a vehicle a shiftable transmission, there's no reason that a computer couldn't do the shifting; there's no need for it to "read your mind".

As for on snow, regenerative braking can feel a lot like engine braking depending on your driving settings. In a vehicle's maximum efficiency mode the motor will very noticeably begin to absorb energy from the wheels when you let up on the "gas".

A chainsaw is a great tool. Some fool chopping his leg off with one doesn't change that.

This can only be a good thing if so. Companies that hire and promote based on merit will always excel over companies that hire based on quota. The truth hurts. Doesn't matter the person's skin colour, orientation, or age, etc. If they are the best person for the job, that should be the only thing that matters.

if everyone is out of work and can't afford to buy houses?

Will the ultimate form of captialism be one CEO directing an AI company to go through the motions of a human economy, just building empty buildings and businesses with huge walls to keep out the people?

Or will the CEO and invenstors be replaced as well?