"Millions of tons of discarded electronics from the United States are being shipped overseas"

Let's be clear: nobody is simply loading up containers with e-waste and blind-shipping them into "Asia" as if unto the void.

1) Someone has e-waste that needs to be disposed.
2) It costs to dispose in the US, so some vendor in Asia is offering to dispose for less than (US costs MINUS shipping costs which are quite low westbound APAC). Or they're even offering to buy it.
3) profit

Blaming - as I think is implied - US vendors for shipping their shit to Asia is like blaming narco-trafficers for 'forcing' their product into the US. The problem here is the PULL not any hypothesized push.

In my experience about fields I know quite well, human reporters and news agencies get it all or partially wrong probably 80% of the time.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending AI in the slightest, just that in 2025 pretty much all news sources are mostly shit.

(lol)

User-agent: *
Disallow: /

Hmmm. Based on that, anyone using any kind of a web browser shouldn't be viewing their web pages.

Which kind of takes the point out of having a web page...

The Kellogg-Briand Pact was an agreement to outlaw war signed on August 27, 1928.

Mabye they could get Francis Fukuyama to draft the document? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_History_and_the_Last_Man)

I doubt this has anything to do with being green, except insofar as it "looks" greener.

More likely this allows them to better gather craptons of model data for their eventually-inevitable self-driving fleet.

BOT account.

I'm trying to understand the narrative here.

I understood from many, many Slashdot posts that Elon Musk and Donald Trump were partners in crime and that SpaceX was Elon's tool for milking the US govt for no-bid contracts. How can NASA open this up to other vendors, doesn't that hurt SpaceX? What's the value of a sinecure if it's so easily ignored?

Snark aside, I welcome competition on this; a thriving PRIVATE space industry in the US will be the only thing that can compete with the power of a dedicated Chinese state (sclerotic risk-averse NASA can't really be relied upon to do so anymore). I do find it rather ironic that the article says SpaceX delays are threatening Artemis, given, well....everything ELSE Artemis-related has been pretty much a mess.
https://www.bgr.com/1997942/wh...

It's funny that's what you read there. Very...insightful. About you, not about the subject.

As we have free public education in this country, and at least in MN there are ample programs to allow low income people to get at least 2yr and many 4yr degrees for basically nothing (as well as whole government offices at the city, county, and state levels with staff to help the un- and underemployed apply for and secure these opportunities) there's nearly no reason these people can't improve their opportunities.

(As much as I think the system is bullshit, a college degree remains universally helpful in landing a decent job.)

While I'd fully agree with you at the tertiary level (college is a fucking scam and has been since at least the mid 1980s), I'm curious how you assert that primary and secondary schooling - which is 90% public in the US, at least - is 'profit driven'?

Wow, fascinating article. Thank you.
Will show my wife who muttered after seeing the umpteenth tiresome post on x "I actually agree that we might reconsider that whole 19th amendment".

https://history.house.gov/Inst...

Let's pick a nice round 50y as 'modern relevance' instead of a cherry-picked 24y?
In the 27 two year govt cycles we have had over the last 50y (incl current)
House: 15/12 Dem/GOP control
Senate: 14/12 (you can look up the exceptions yourself)
President: 12/15
Unified (one party controls all 3)
As for the Supremes, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... well, that's the result of the 12/15 president bias.
So basically your victim narrative is ALREADY bullshit.

The fact that you don't seem to grasp that the problem with Obamacare (which you're right, was Romneycare before that) is the FEDERAL OVERREACH, not the plan itself, shows your own little Overton window. You don't get to define the frame of the argument.

The liberals ARE responsible for a lot that goes wrong because they insist they have some sort of monopoly on truth, and are certain of their own infallibility.

OK, sigh:
- IANAIL (I am not an immigration lawyer) but 'due process' doesn't mean everyone gets to stand in front of a judge. As I understand, it is longstanding precedent (since 2009 Obama admin, iirc) that illegals CAN be arrested and processed and moved around without the sorts of requirements needed for legal citizens. Thus: this IS due process, for them, according to our laws.
- denying free speech re the DoD: (shrug) it's certainly a break from practice. Then again, news agencies used to also go fetch the news, not rely on it being spoon fed to them by govt officials. I FULLY agree with the requirements for escorted access (that it was ever otherwise is insane), and explicitly stating that if they're soliciting leakers that will be weighed against their future access. Most of the organizations there have more or less declared themselves OPENLY in opposition to the president. That's fine, if you want to throw off the (faux) mantle of objectivity, why can't the president play along? Would it have been better if Fox/Newsmax *had* agreed?
- most of his claims are clearly in the tenor of a joke or trolling the hypersensitive left. I find it amusing personally that the Left loses any conception of idiom, exaggeration, sarcasm, or vernacular where Trump is concerned. Yesterday I saw a snip of a Trump conversation "Vladimir, how would you like it if I gave Zelensky 1000 Tomahawks?" to which the tame leftists trotted out "US presidents never asked an enemy for permission before..."...I mean, that's just stupid.

Then I'd say either you're not paying attention, or it's confirmation bias "I agree with them, how could that be biased?" - don't get me wrong, that's a natural human view point.
But to claim you've never heard a single example is...rather on the order of the (apocryphal) "I don't know a single person who voted for Nixon" in 1972...

And further, please don't think I'm implying that the problem's not WORSE on much of the MAGA side of the fence. (Then again, considering the public discourse in the last 5 years, it's apparent that 'anyone not toeing the line on Leftist talking points = MAGA' which itself is deeply, obviously, dishonest. )

How about an NPR editor saying it himself? https://www.thefp.com/p/npr-ed...

Bill Maher, hardly a right wing commentator, has asserted NPR has a hard left bias: https://www.facebook.com/TheHi...
Katherine Maher herself PERSONALLY is...awful. https://www.reddit.com/r/liber...
"...(the truth) might be a bit of distraction, getting in the way of getting important things done."
Sorry: from my POV I can't even conceive of the mindset that could utter those words in that order. And she's THE BOSS.

Allsides says it leans left https://www.allsides.com/news-...
Media Bias says it's left-center https://mediabiasfactcheck.com...
Adfont says it skews left https://adfontesmedia.com/wp-c...

How do you define a "woman" again, Mr Brain Surgeon?