Because Altman already has Nadella by the short ones.

Microsoft has market cap of something like 3.5T

Microsoft got talked into something like a 30% stake in OpenAI that is worth about 140B.

All and all something in the area of 3-4% of Microsoft's value is the belief OpenAI is worth what its valued at and continues to be invest-able. If OpenAI were to implode, it will show up on Microsoft's balance sheet enough the board might actually start looking for a new CEO..

tariffs are more limited hands off form of taxation than the alternatives.

if you don't want to pay them; buy something domestic or just hold onto your money. Compare that income or property taxes...

The limited hands off government I think we ought to have would eliminate income and property taxes and implement a national sales tax. The America first government I think we ought to have would enact strong tariffs to ensure domestic industry is protected and domestic alternative goods and products are preferred, but leave you free to import French wine and Chinese e-waste if you really really want to and are willing to pay the taxes..

The fact there can be a 40% decline in an entire category and you don't see it on the streets, in the form of empty shelves, shuttered websites etc suggests to me that a lot of economists when the considered tariff impacts wild underestimated the gamification of shopping.

There are ton of people out there that just scroll and a click buy on things they don't need and if they thought about it for more than moment would realize they don't actually really want - they're just bored...They solve that by frequently ordering momentarily interesting crap for $30 because "its cheap."

I don't personally nor do I know anyone who says they miss TEMU or missing the extra few pages of junk to scroll thru first on Amazon one little bit.

I imagine the people who do, still having their needs for the instant gratification of opening a package, any package are met with trash from Dollar General

I think you underestimate how far the country has moved and how quickly. You underestimate the degree to which sexism is a thing of the past and you underestimate how accustomed to a total lack of professionalism in governance we BOTH the first Trump administration and the following Biden Clown show complete with its klepto-cross-dressers had made us.

In 2014 people did care about that stuff. In 2024, buffoonery from candidates and cabinet members is normalized. Heck look at Fetterman in one Senate term I honestly thing most of the country has gone from how did Pennsylvania elect that slob to, dang he is one few actually serious people around!

Norms and expectations are shifting very rapidly.

This entire argument is BS. It is completely undercut by the fact Women seem to be perfectly able to be elected Governor.

America will absolutely vote for a female president. As soon as one runs who isn't a completely unlikable opportunist, empty-headed, or NPC whose politics are whatever is popular this week.

It isn't sexism that has kept women from the White House, all of them who have run have lost for the same reasons all the men who did not get elected lost. (Caveat this applies to the last 40 years or so)

if they went public they'd have to use GAAP for all their financial statements. Given the billions in deals they have inked I'd be almost shocked if the accounting isnt on the creative side currently.

Harder to bilk^H^H^H^H^Hattact sophisticated investors when you can be accurately compared to your peers.

I think if you really look at airport security; you have to realize it is designed to enable response rather than to really prevent.

Sure of some stuff like limiting liquids is done in hopes of stopping bombs on planes etc; but most of the security enhancements are really of the log and collect variety. I assume the security apparatus believes they can spot and identify the terrorists and organized criminals traveling and go pick them up before they attack whatever non-airport target.

Clearly there is no practical way to protect the airport itself. Look at the Boston bombing killing and maiming hundreds can be accomplished with a relatively small device. So walk into the terminal with your carry on bag buy a ticket, hit the security line, usually adjacent to other security lines, with 100s of people in close proximity and boom! A suicide bomber there could have devastating impacts.

The answer put forward is the jihadists would never do that because after 9/11 it would be an admission they are actually less capable then they used to be / western security is better. However looking at Bondi Beach and similar recent terror attacks on soft targets they are in fact pretty impactful in terms of politics and society feeling secure enough to function. I don't expect it to be long before some terror group does decide to strike a busy airport. It won't take more than couple attacks on security lines to make everyone very very afraid to travel again.

That is the problem Archie, you don't need a refreshed you know exactly why but you stubbornly refuse to accept it.

China has a value system completely antithetical to yours. China very much wants Chinese hegemony, in the way the 20th century was the America century.

if you actually give a ***** about anything the things you claim to care about, you should be hellbent on ensuring that does not happen. We all know what you will do though, you'll pretend to care about freedom, democracy, equality etc, while you turn the world over to people that will oppress everyone who isnt Han Chinese and economically at first, violently later anyone who does not agree with the party, no matter where in the world you happen to be.

Hey you get to enjoy your cheap crap today right, and run anound being smug about how bad tariffs are. Honestly you deserve Xi's boot (or leather Wingtip as the case may be) on your neck..

They way you control your enemies is you kneecap them opportunity arises.

China is the proof your argument is bullshit. "Open China' has been the policy for how many decades?

All keeping China close has done is
- Let them industrialize
- Let take massive technological leaps by importing western knowledge
- Let them build up a massive armed force we probably can't counter
- Let them a ton to time develop weapons systems (hyper sonic missiles specifically) that will utterly negate our own usual force projection strategy. Look at any of the war games information that leaked out..The Gerald R. Ford is sunk in HOURS...
- Let them make themselves a critical part of the supply chain for the things we need to build modern smart weapons
      TL:DR we lose access to Taiwan, it just a matter of attrition, we deplete our stocks of modern weapons long before we can stand up the manufacturing of advanced semiconductors and other supply chain elements to replace them. Once we run out of stuff China moves in and captures the strategic islands in the pacific.

We are really really fucked, precisely because we let them get to near.

I don't get the Rust hatred. C has implicitly had an "unsafe" mode for much longer than Rust.

If you're a C kernel developer, you can jump on the Rust bandwagon very easily: just put the keyword unsafe in your comments and you can write code just like Rust developers.

Maybe, just maybe, this mistake was caused by the fact that the same sort of people who are likely to write bugs into their code are the same types of people who prefer "safe" languages because understanding the subtle nuances of how computers work is difficult. They would prefer a system where they couldn't make mistakes, rather than a system where they had to understand the code and the machine to a high level. There's a place in the world for these sorts of people, but it's not in OS/kernel development. The sort of I-can't-make-mistakes-with-Rust mindset probably lulled the coder into a false sense of security, with the predictable outcome.

it was in an 'unsafe' section for what it is worth.

But then systems programing means you're going to have a lot of that. So maybe rust really isn't such a good systems language... as it does not really get you much when you can't use its safety features.

utter nonsense.

There was no real problem sidelining as many people during the pandemic and similarly the economy even the economics of places like NOVA and DC during government shut downs was not collapse.

Any landlord with sense would have waited to start evictions knowing their usually in good standing tenants who are late this month likely have a temporary reason. State and Locals could have found a way to make food-stamps or something like it availible to ensure groceries got purchased.

It was in no way necessary to bail out the credit market.

Similarity lenders and mortgage services are not unsophisticated, they could have easily run some reports to see which entities were paying more than monthly load payment etc. They could have reached out to those borrowers and offered to match some portion of additional dollars. That would not have required modifying loans that might be parted up or anything, it would have secured cash for current obligations at the cost of profits, but well that is how its supposed to work.

The finance industry got away with fleecing us all because the Treasury, Fed, and POTUS turned out to have a pair testicles between em.

Exactly AIG never should have got a bailout.

I honestly thought Bush was/had been doing a fairly good job up until the point he turned his back capitalism.

He'd be drawn like a moth to flame in this discussion yet he hasn't materialized. - Must mean his primary account has mod points. I have already seen a number of 'disagree' mods here.