I just saw a job ad looking for programmers who have at least five years' experience of being replaced by AI.

Most CEOs add very little value over a replacement CEO. And as part of this equation, most boards overestimate their ability to pick a candidate who will delivery value over replacement and they wildly overpay in their attempt. They would be better off paying some amible middle manager just 10 times the average programmer's salary to network and sift though the proposals generated by AI.

Fixing this can be the new Y2K. Full employment if you're good with the cyber!

Couldn't Trump's legal department just subpoena your ISP? And wouldn't spam filters block your emails if your servers are behind seven proxies (to avoid having your IP exposed)?

He doesn't care about that, he's just happy to present a scenario in which our fascist killbot-wanting regime isn't as abhorrent or alarming.

When your only tool is a laser, every problem looks like a large balloon.

Greetings! The good news is that your time machine has successfully transported you to the year 2026. The bad news is that it's 2026.

The saddest thing about your post is that it was likely paid for by American taxpayers.

Also, AOL keyword ReamMe

I was going to ask this very question.

But it was a genius move, since nobody noticed his demanding a cut off the profits of ... whatever--as the AC would have us believe he believes. Nobody who can use a web browser is as dumb as they pretend to be while justifying the malfeasance du jure.

I'll add that the "leftist" observation that Twitter was a private company and had no obligation to to amplify anyone was in response to Rightists claiming "Section 230 violations" and "First Amendment Violations" that should result in government sanctions. Now the algo is implemented by a self-proclaimed mecha-Hitler that undresses children, and the people who cheer it pretend that nobody is old enough to remember the before times.

History shows again and again how nature points out the follies of man.

Arizona pays $9,500 in per-capita income tax and receives $14,800 back. I imagine some of that may be spent on roads.

Many people--including fans of Jimmy Kimmel, or drag performance, or news reports critical of the president or the late St. Charlie, or non-violent protesters--would consider government seizure of the means of speech to be the greatest threat to free speech. But it's true that you can now insult out-groups and tout ivermectin on Twitter now, so I guess the First Amendment is doing better than ever!