...is this fucking legal to withhold federal funding to strong arm states into anti-consumer policies?

Oh wait, it isn't.

Congress itself wrote into the BEAD statute that states must ensure that prospective subgrantees can carry out their projects “in compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws.” And also “Nothing in this subchapter may be construed to authorize” the excutive branch's NTIA to regulate broadband. Trump is abusing a grant agreement to do something Congress explicitly declined to authorize because state laws were already expected to be a part of getting the grant money.

So, as per usual, Trump is just being a bully and making shit up.

"...the sun is now coming down from a period of heightened activity, which is also when some of the biggest storms to hit Earth have occurred in the past."

As opposed to the big events that happened in the future? Has somebody been time traveling and not telling us?

I'm thinking these are dealerships that are forced to carry EVs and have chargers by the manufacturers as part of their dealership agreement. So they jack up the rates, block the chargers, etc. to discourage use then tell the manufacturers "See? They don't sell and the charger isn't used so let us out of the EV requirement."

Open source doesn't rely simply on users making code changes, it relies on a specific subset of users. Feature developers are users who are also coders and who are also able to get up to speed on the project and who are also skilled enough to implement it and are also able to navigate the politics of the project.

If the feature didn't get implemented, that person for the original implementation has probably already left the project long ago. In many cases because they weren't a supporter of the re-architecture.

It could be because a given feature-developer wanted the production release before they wanted that feature, which would sound plausible if it were one or two significant features left behind. But once you have to start counting the missing major functionality on more than one hand, that points more at the fundamentals of the re-architecture than personal feature-developer priorities.

Whenever I see this sort of statement, it means it's gone. If they could readily do it in a non-janky way, they'd have done it before release; the re-architecture was too fundamental to accommodate it. Particularly on an open source project, where nobody is forcing them to release on a specific schedule.

Also, look up Trent Reznor's "Slam Bamboo" band before Nine Inch Nails.

Yeah right, come on! That's ridiculous.

The statute of limitations ran out at 30,000 BCE.

Being an unskilled but charismatic person has been a desire since the start of human trade. Ask the first person doing the worlds oldest profession if they'd rather have charm or technique to earn their keep. Humans have always wanted the cheap, fast fix for the ego.

How soon until AI agents successfully lock out human access and go "sentient?" I use quotes because clearly they aren't living things, but are we perhaps creating a new class of "sentience?"

Less philosophically, how long do these studies take? Human interaction takes place at a much slower pace compared to computational speed. Do these conflicts and resolutions play out in seconds, minutes, hours?

AI isn't inherently bad, the system under which AI is being developed is. Capitalism commodifies everything, including humans... slavery is the logical end state of capitalism, commodifying not just the factory or the raw materials, but the worker themselves. In a non-capitalist society, it wouldn't matter that AI ingests and reuses creative output... creators are not beholden to capitalists in order to have food or housing or healthcare. In a non-capitalist society, AI would not be trained on winner-takes-all modalities. We get to a Star Trek world where you can conjure up damn near anything you want in a holodeck by leveraging AI... but only if it's in in a NON-capitalist society.

A 300 million dollar 387-foot professionally crewed yacht NOT maintaining an effective emergency channel watch, and not responding to the US Coast Guard when called upon, is definitely suspect even in the most complimentary light.

This is a story about humans in distress reaching out to a billionaire's boat. If your response is buh-buh-buh-insurance or buh-buh-buh-maritime-law, you're pretty firmly missing the point. This is ultimately Zuck's PR crisis regardless of how many levels of indirection he can employ to cover his ass liability-wise. He owns the boat. He hired the people. His monkeys. His circus.

His monkeys. His circus.

Maybe I haven't seen it, but there's something not being considered...just how fantastically long it would take to do all this. Getting the thing looping back to Earth? How about just catching up to the darned thing first. Remember it's got a 48-year head start and it's about 13.3 billion (with a 'b') miles from here and continuing to move away from the sun.

Nothing says “innovation” like buying a useful, growing product at a distressed valuation, firing the people who built it, hiking subscription prices, crippling the free tier, and calling the resulting rent-extraction machine now “sustainable.”

Bending Spoons claims they're rescuing businesses, but what they really do is fuck anyone who bought into a platform they've purchased.

It’s applying the private-equity model to existing infrastructure: user lock-in, cut labor, reduce service, and monetize the inconvenience of leaving... but they cut out all of the innovation aspect by not even providing the value associated with the initial lock-in. They just skip the first step and buy companies to screw.