I sampled your mother first.

Most of the people that go to Vegas know they're not going to win anything. My grandparents used to go every year, and that vacation was their annual highlight. They set aside a budget, enjoyed themselves blowing it on the tables, then enjoyed the hotels and the shows. This was the early 60's, mind you, the height of the Rat Pack era when Sinatra and Dean Martin were still playing there, and there was a mobbed-up mystique about the place to the WWII generation. My grands knew they weren't going to win anything. They just enjoyed the thrill of it all. It was the "adult" Disneyland, a bit of naughty fun for people that survived the skies and fields of Europe and Asia, and as far as they were concerned, "fuck you, I'll blow my spare money as I see fit".

Most men still have a PC simply for gaming, if nothing else. Women don't give a shit about gaming. And the phone is the natural instrument for their Instagraming.

My wife has a nice laptop that she barely touches. She'll pull it out every once in a blue moon, but she and all the women she knows use two things primarily: their phones, and their tablets for reading. The smartphone was the perfect product for females. It fits the way they communicate. A lot of men would be fine with plain texting, email, and maybe some IRC. Women crave that constat, content-filled social connection.

The shrinking userbase doesnâ(TM)t have jack shit to do with 11â(TM)s requirements, and everything to do with women using their phones for everything now. It was silly to even attempt that argument.The writer went on a Windows rant when this shift has been predicted for 25+ years. There are kids with $500+ smartphones that have never touched a computer.

Facts hurt you little fella?

US raises tariffs on things: "Trump shouldn't put a tariff on incoming goods because it's all going to go to the price the US consumer will ultimately pay; a tariff on foreign goods is going to be paid by US consumers!"

Canada raises tariffs on things: "You go girl! Show your national strength resisting foreign economic hegemony ! "

Tsia

Right, the enshittification of YouTube began Nov 9, 2024.

Brilliant insight, please share more.

Lol +1, proved like 2 comments down.

https://homeland.house.gov/202...

"STARTLING STATS FACTSHEET: Fiscal Year 2024 Ends With Nearly 3 Million Inadmissible Encounters"
Yes, I'm deeply, deeply sorry - that "nearly" COMPLETELY CHANGES my point.

"2.99 million illegals wouldn't be any difference at all!" -said the democrat.
Although your "no where near" would also be a lie, wouldn't it?

This is Canada imposing a tax on services from firms outside the country.

There is no logical basis for the tax aside from Canada (like most national govt anywhere) trying to take a cut off any money moving anywhere.

Personally, I'm fine with it, they're a sovereign state. If they agreed to remove it and have reneged, well, they will have to deal with the consequences.

I think reasonable people can agree that IQ is a simplistic measure to comprehend & evaluate the complex nature of human intellect.

Sadly in our empirical era, everything of value (it seems) must be quantified, ideally to a one-dimensional number be it IQ or value.

... And the fact that they're getting more and more upset when you interpose barriers between them and (unsupervised) access to children simply proves the point.

This was a dumb, dumb hill for Democrats to pick to die on. Most reasonable liberals I know in private agree, so we argue about other actual political points of merit. Supporting objectively crazy people in their pedophilia is never going to be a winner (except, apparently, with liberal white women but that's ok, their primary political interest seems to be about murdering their own spawn when desired, shrug).

It's neither, it's mostly just him.

He could have the wisdom of Solomon (he doesn't), the oratory of Cicero (he doesn't), the support of the media (he doesn't) and you'd still have violent, murderous opposition to a political outsider from those who profited very nicely from 3 million illegals a year. Which was apparently incredibly easy to stop when we tried?

He's a rude, vulgar man. He's wrong about some things. Doesn't mean he's wrong about a country needing to fix itself instead of justifying the importation of near slave labor. In this debate he's actually taking the position of the 1960s-flavor liberal east coaster he is, fundamentally.

Who said the price controls and massive profits are at the local grocery store level?