I don't know what to think about this. Does it indicate less monopolistic behavior from Amazon or more? Is this better or worse for the Walmart? For the consumer? Does this mean Walmart is faltering in this space?

I have ordered a lot from Amazon and some from Walmart and really haven't had a problem with either. But there really aren't other solid choices in this now narrow space. Target as a very distant third? I would hate to see it just be one.

>"If I see a Black pilot, Iâ(TM)m going to be like, boy, I hope heâ(TM)s qualified. â" The Charlie Kirk Show, 23 January 2024"

Nice try, picking something out of context, which seems really, really popular now. His discussion was about DEI/Affirmative Action, specifically about airline pilot racial hiring quotas, and how quotas end up lowering excellence by displacing otherwise more qualified candidates. And what effect that can have on people's thinking by casting shadows of doubt. He said, as part of a conversation:

"I mean, like, if you want to go thought crime... I'm sorry if I see a black pilot, I'm going to be like, boy, I hope he's qualified. You wouldn't have done that, that's not who I am. That's not what I believe."

>"The reason most fruit and vegetable harvesting is not automated is that the technology doesn't yet exist.Maybe in a few years or decades, we'll have machines or robots that can pick fruits and vegetables, but likely not anytime soon."

The market will create demand for such technologies, if/when they become necessary. If there is no demand because it can be filled with cheap human labor, then that is what is used. If that supply dries up, labor prices will rise, and companies will be madly developing and competing for creating effective automation. Absolutely guaranteed. And the pricing of that automation will drop rapidly over time as supply increases. And, eventually, it will probably be cheaper and better than the cheap labor it replaced.

We have seen this happen many times, it isn't magic or mystery, it is the free market in action.

Thankfully, I am in the around 50% of people whose homes are not in a HOA. (And I think of the 50% of those that are in HOA are in condos/townhouses, so that is pretty normal/expected/necessary).

An HOA can be a good thing, a bad thing or just neutral. Just depends on the HOA and your needs/expectations. About 60% report positive experiences, 26% neutral, and 14% negative.

In almost all cases, it is voluntary (and hardly a valid comparison to China)- you know what you are getting into when you buy. Of course what you are getting into CAN CHANGE, which is the scary part.

>"People under 18 should not be permitted to enter into contracts without parental permission."

Parents and their agents should not give unrestricted internet-connected devices to their children, or allow them access to such devices, without direct supervision.

It isn't about not allowing a contract with minors, which would encumber every site out there to force every user (adult) to "ID" themselves and then be tracked, striping everyone of their privacy. The parent(s) gave a minor a device on which he could, apparently, load any app he wanted. Or the device was set up with a blacklist instead of a whitelist, which simply isn't enough.

>"If it because the cultural norm, they won't be encountering unlocked devices from their friends or at school."

Typo. That is "If it became the cultural norm,"

I will also add- if they do encounter, randomly, some non-locked device on the way to school or at a friend's house, occasionally, for limited times, that is an acceptable risk. It isn't the same as having access all day and night on their own devices.

>"And though parental supervision is THE TOOL, it doesn't apply when they're walking to and from school, on someone else's phone, or even using a laptop in a playground. Trust me. I know."

If it because the cultural norm, they won't be encountering unlocked devices from their friends or at school.

>"Don't make / allow kids to use unsuitable tools, and AI companies should be offering a "child-safe" AI that simply isn't trained and can't discuss anything it shouldn't be able to discuss with a child unsupervised."

Agreed, make child-friendly apps and versions sites that can be whitelisted on the locked device by the parents/guardians/schools. But don't lock down everything on the internet for adults.

>"If Linux was as much of a supported platform as Windows is, Linux's market share would be much closer in parity to Windows."

How exactly would that be possible when almost all non-Apple computers come with MS-Windows pre-configured and pre-installed? That isn't a function of consumer demand, consumers don't really know they have any choice, other than an "Apple" computer or a "PC".

>"Consumer Reports has urged Microsoft to keep supporting Windows 10 beyond its October 2025 cutoff, saying the move will "strand millions of consumers" who have machines incompatible with Windows 11."

And every one of those machines is almost certainly compatible with Linux. Throw Mint on there and have a free, mostly familiar, easy-to-use, easy-to-update, stable, secure, high-performance, robust, privacy-respecting, and supported OS for many years to come.

Or continue to whine at Microsoft "This isn't 'fair', I deserve to be locked into your platform for longer for free."

>"We know this is a privacy compromise for adults"

At least they are aware of that

>"but believe it is a worthy tradeoff,"

Well, it is not. It is a dystopian hell that every adult will have to be challenged, ID'ed, and tracked on every site because parents (and their agents) refuse to protect their children.

>"OpenAI introduced parental controls to ChatGPT earlier in September"

The correct parental controls are that parents should not give unrestricted internet-connected devices to their children, or allow them access to such devices, without direct supervision.

>"Unfortunately, it's becoming increasingly likely that every other damn site on the internet is going to make you show ID, all because parental control settings are too much of a hassle."

Which is why approval to access a site or not needs to be under parental control on the devices, themselves. It should not be the responsibility of every single site on the Internet.

The "solution" is *NOT* to pick a few sites and force every adult to "ID" themselves. Children should not have access to unrestricted Internet-connected devices when not supervised by a trusted adult. That needs to be the new cultural norm and expectation. In my view, the parents (or their agents) allowing otherwise are guilty of possible child neglect or abuse.

>"Too many people major in a subject they like, instead of ones that are in demand."

It is more complex than that. Also, too many people major in a subject that is in demand FOR WHICH they ALSO have no interest and no talent. They end up dropping out, or getting by and hit the workforce and are pretty much useless. I have seen it. Having a "degree" is not a golden ticket to a happy and productive career. I am not sure if ever has been, but it is especially less so as each decade goes by.

So:

1) Determine what interests you.
2) Determine what your skills and strengths are.
3) Determine where #1 and #2 overlap.
4) Determine what the jobs market is like.
5) Determine the overlap between #3 and #4.
6) Determine if a college degree is even necessary for #5
7) And if it is, match your realistic ability to pay now/later with which school/college/whatever.
8) Do it.

>"Problem is few high school seniors are informed enough to make this decision, and we are seeing the results."

Bingo

It is a lot of work, and it is something high-school guidance counselors and parents are not doing enough of or well-enough. And we need to start holding colleges at least partially financially responsible for the real-world outcomes of their offerings (which degrees, which subjects, which students to admit to them, how well they actually learned, and what assistance was given to get a job in that field).

>"The lawsuit says that Juliana was using the app without her parents' knowledge or permission."

Let's be real about this. We all know that the parents very likely had NO KNOWLEDGE OR PERMISSION about ANYTHING that child was doing on those devices. They probably gave her a phone and/or tablet and/or computer with full (or nearly full) access to the Internet to do whatever she wanted and install any app she wanted and communicate with any stranger she wanted. This is THE NORM right now and has been for many years. **THAT** is the main problem.

You CANNOT approach this problem with a no-list or blacklist mentality. You can't expect the problem to be solved by pointing at a few aspects/apps/sites to be responsible or magically restrict things to be safe. It isn't just a "social media" problem, or "AI problem", or "violence/porn/whatever site" problem.

It has to be approached with a whitelist mentality- these are the few things that are safe to install/use, the few people that are safe to communicate with, the few sites that are safe to visit, and everything else is ACCESS DENIED without active adult supervision. Scale and adjust based on age/maturity.

>"The battery heater in BEVs does NOT use water-based coolants at all because of the risk in case it leaks. Instead, they use glycol."

That generalization is not correct. My Ariya uses regular antifreeze:

"The cooling system is filled at the factory with a pre-diluted mixture of 50% Genuine NISSAN Long Life Antifreeze/Coolant
(blue) and 50% water to provide year-round antifreeze and coolant protection. The antifreeze solution contains rust and
corrosion inhibitors. Additional cooling system additives are not necessary."

There are two circuits and two tanks which both use the same type of traditional coolant. One for the battery system and one for the electric drive train. The battery coolant circulates below the battery pack and is used both for cooling and heating the battery pack.

>"Tesla even has a sensor that will disable the HV battery if it detects a conductive liquid in the battery loop."

Not all EV's are Teslas.

>"I recently got a mobility scooter. Its speed is limited to 4mph. Maybe e-bikes should be limited thusly. Slow everyone the fuck down."

Um, 4mph is unreasonably low for any type of bicycle. That is just brisk walking speed. Had you said 10mph, I would probably agree. One of the purposes of riding a bike instead of walking is save some significant time.

In any case, if it is a true "e-bike" then you can't really limit speed, you can just limit how much assistance to pedaling effort. So a 10mph limit would just mean it would no longer assist you if you try to go above 10mph. You can still go faster with human effort...

That is, unless you want the motor to be programmed to work AGAINST you after a certain speed. But regular bicycles have no such limits, so doing that would be strange. I don't think such a move/restriction would be accepted as rational.