"Digital certificates" seems like the item that's of most potential interest. Sure, in terms of what pitiful reporting requirements there are some accounts payable information from 5 years ago is the part that people will fret about and HPE will deny; but for a company that has its fingers in a fair amount of UEFI and BMC firmware the question of exactly what certificates they aren't keeping a tight leash on seems more relevant.

Tell that to the federal government, which controls fire policy on federal lands, where almost two-thirds of California's wildfires start.

California can only fix what California controls.

Also, it isn't really practical to clear out all of the underbrush on 33 million acres. Conservatively maybe 20 to 30 person hours per acre, you're looking at about a billion person hours. I mean sure, if you could give every person in California a tractor, you'd be done in three days, but in practice, you'd be talking about spending 6% of California's budget on it even if you paid everyone minimum wage. At more realistic salaries, you'd be talking about spending approximately all of California's budget on clearing brush every year for all of eternity, and that's before factoring in equipment costs.

I just don't see how that could realistically be practical. If you only do it around big cities, yeah, but statewide, probably not.

Total for the entire U.S. is something like 3.6 million class 8 trucks. So not all that many. California has a ninth the population and a ninth of the trucks. Imagine that.

ROFL. No. Your math clearly sucks.

A typical battery-electric vehicle (car sized) contains about 183 pounds of copper. There are 1.47 billion cars in the world. That's about 135 million tons of copper to replace every car in the world, which is equivalent to the world's copper mining for a little over five years.

There are only 4 million semi trucks in the entire United States. There are 15.9 million trucks in California, but most of those are pickup trucks, and most of the rest are much smaller than a semi. So most of those are going to contain closer to 183 pounds of copper than to 815 pounds. And I'm pretty sure that at least the pickup trucks are included in that 1.47 billion number.

There are about four million class 8 trucks in the U.S., which likely means there are under 100 million in the world. That's 41 million tons, which is less than the world's copper production for two years. And this is likely to be a high estimate by a factor of two or three.

So you'd likely need less than 176 million tons of copper spread out over 20 years, which is only about 40% of the world's copper mining for EVs. That's a lot, but it isn't beyond the realm of possibility.

Pro tip: If the industry is telling you that something is possible and your math is showing that it would take orders of magnitude more raw materials than are available, you probably mixed up pounds and tons.

Citation needed. Oh, you can't provide one, because other than affordability, everything you just said is wrong:

• California's crime rate is at record low levels on a per-capita basis. Yeah, there are a lot of crimes, but only because there are a lot of people. The violent crime rate has dropped from being one of the worst states in 1979 to being somewhere in the middle.
• California's K-12 schools are only ranked lower than the rest of the country because California has a much larger non-native speaker population. When you exclude scores from people who are still learning English, it is pretty much average.
• California's homeless population grew by just 3% in 2024. The national average was 18%. California is doing way better than most of the country in that area.
• California would love to prevent wildfires, but they can't stop you from driving your gasoline-powered cars and contributing to the climate change that is fueling the droughts that have turned the state into a tinderbox. And although they are forcing power companies to improve their power lines, it takes time.

Also, almost two-thirds of wildfires in California start on federal lands, where California has no control over the fire management. This is not accidental. California has been complaining about federal fire management for decades. There's only so much you can do when the deck is stacked against you.

How's that? The hurricanes seem to be getting worse and more frequent, and it has the second-highest rate of fraud in the country, behind only Georgia. (In most years, Florida has been the worst.)

How is DeSantis popular on a bipartisan basis? He has only a 10% approval rating and a 72% disapproval rating among Democrats according to a poll from a month ago.

If you want a state with a governor that is actually liked by both parties, try Kentucky.

And intent is a requirement of the criminal statute, which means that they did not find enough evidence to warrant prosecution. If the evidence were there, they would have prosecuted, I think... and they should have.

Note how different that is from Trump's stolen documents case, in which there was abundant evidence of both wrongdoing and specific criminal intent. That did (and still does) warrant prosecution.

You seriously don't think falsifying business records should be a crime? No, it's typically not a felony, but when it's used in furtherance of another crime, the felony enhancement seems sensible to me.

The victims of the other crime that was furthered. The other crime, in case you're not aware, was illegal campaign contributions. The victim of that crime was the American people, who likely would have made a different choice at the ballot box in 2016 had Trump's payoff and falsified records succeeded in hiding the affair from them. Or maybe they would have made the same choice; that's really not relevant. The point is that it's really bad for democracy to allow candidates to commit crimes to hide information from voters, regardless of whether or not it would influence the outcome of any specific election.

We have these campaign finance and disclosure laws for good reason. Of course, this really should have been prosecuted by the FEC, rather than left to NY state. The story of why that didn't happen, even though the FEC attorneys who looked at the facts recommended it should, makes for sad reading.

No, the Republicans are not serious. They're completely incapable of governing, they've stopped even pretending. The evidence is abundant, but the mere fact that Senate Republicans are considering confirming Trump's laughably unqualified cabinet nominees is sufficient.

This is very true, and well-stated.

What we have right now is a Democratic party that is too afraid of its progressive wing to call bullshit on the insane ideas they've been pushing hard for the last couple of decades, and a Republican party that is a cult of personality to a malignant narcissist suffering from rapidly increasing dementia and far more interested in "owning the libs" than in making anything better. The sensible people in both parties, who are capable of rational debate and compromise, are too afraid of negative blowback from their own parties to do it. The Democrats can't say, for example, that there are two sexes, and the Republicans can't say that Trump lost in 2020, or that January 6th, 2021 was actually a bad thing. Those aren't the issues that we need debate and compromise on, but they're emblematic of just how much control the extremists in both parties have gained.

I'm less concerned about that than about the fact that these coins and DJT stock provide near-perfect vehicles for bribes to the President of the US. Trump has already demonstrated that he can be bought with the TikTok flip flop. That only cost the TikTok CEO $18M... though leveraging it through Trump's memestock increased Trump's net worth by more than $2B.

What a steaming pile of made up bullshit.

https://www.monitordaily.com/news-posts/california-dmv-likely-to-deny-thousands-of-commercial-trucks-registration/

That's the summary. The actual text of the law says "SALE OF CERTAIN THREE-DIMENSIONAL PRINTERS. 1. ANY RETAILER OF A THREE-DIMENSIONAL PRINTER SOLD IN THIS STATE WHICH IS CAPABLE OF PRINTING A FIREARM, OR ANY COMPONENTS OF A FIREARM, ..."

So that covers all 3D printers, short of someone coming up with a way to magically determine whether something is or is not potentially a component of a firearm and preventing printing it if it is.

As I wrote in 2010: https://pdfernhout.net/recogni...
"There is a fundamental mismatch between 21st century reality and 20th century security thinking. Those "security" agencies are using those tools of abundance, cooperation, and sharing mainly from a mindset of scarcity, competition, and secrecy. Given the power of 21st century technology as an amplifier (including as weapons of mass destruction), a scarcity-based approach to using such technology ultimately is just making us all insecure. Such powerful technologies of abundance, designed, organized, and used from a mindset of scarcity could well ironically doom us all whether through military robots, nukes, plagues, propaganda, or whatever else... Or alternatively, as Bucky Fuller and others have suggested, we could use such technologies to build a world that is abundant and secure for all. ... The big problem is that all these new war machines [and competitive companies] and the surrounding infrastructure are created with the tools of abundance. The irony is that these tools of abundance are being wielded by people still obsessed with fighting over scarcity. So, the scarcity-based political mindset driving the military [and economic] uses the technologies of abundance to create artificial scarcity. That is a tremendously deep irony that remains so far unappreciated by the mainstream."

It's also an estimate for capacity for 10 plasmapheresis runs on each person over the course of a year; not 'treatment' being a single extraction. I don't know what you'd expect the number to look like; but it's a factor of ten more reasonable than if you were reading 'treat' as being a single extraction.

Nope. The summary of the bill says "Requires a criminal history background check for the purchase of a three-dimensional printer capable of creating firearms; prohibits sale to a person who would be disqualified on the basis of criminal history from being granted a license to possess a firearm."

In fact, the way I read the bill, the seller has to provide a way for you to get fingerprinted and submit that for a background check, and they'll get back to the seller within 15 days to say whether they are allowed to sell you the 3D printer. In effect, this is likely to mean an almost-month-long waiting period for buying a 3D printer by the time you actually receive it.

Because of the extreme difficulty in complying with such a policy, this law would likely mean the end of online 3D printer purchases in New York, and prices of 3D printers in New York would skyrocket to never-before-imagined levels because of a near complete lack of competition. Either that or it would get struck down when applied to sales from out of state, in which case it would effectively destroy a bunch of local merchants without having any other meaningful effect.

Either way, if you want to see a quarter of a million tech industry workers move from NYC to a suburb on the other side of the river over the next year, this is how you do it in one easy bill.

There's just not enough crack in the world for this to make sense.

Came to say exactly this.

When you apply for a job, you're applying to a company, but the company isn't the one making the hiring decisions. There's a recruiter who handles the interview process, and may screw up and lose track of candidates, may get laid off, may get sick at exactly the right time, etc. There's a hiring manager who may do the same. There's sometimes a hiring committee that makes the decision. And any part of that process can get gummed up.

But all of those people involved in that process, in addition to the employees on your new team, know who you are and know that you failed to show up. They don't know that [recruiter #1397] dropped the ball and left you hanging. They don't know that the hiring committee made you go through five rounds of interviews because of team fit failures. They just know that they hired you and you didn't show up.

And when you go looking for another job in the future, they're going to remember "This is the person whom we hired, and who didn't bother to show up." And they're not going to make that mistake again.

You're not just burning bridges with the company. You're burning bridges with your new team and everyone involved in the hiring process, at every future company that those people might end up working for.

Often, the answer is one of the following:

• They were being considered for other teams at the same company, and they turned out to be a better fit for one of those teams.
• They took a job at a different company for reasons that had nothing to do with the company being bad (e.g. because the other company's location would give them an easier commute).
• They actually applied for the job to give them leverage for a promotion at their current job, and didn't have any intention of taking it if that promotion happened.
• The job posting was a generic job posting that wasn't tied to a specific hiring manager, and some other team got headcount, so the company needs more people than they previously did.

In almost every case above, the hiring manager or recruiter won't know why someone chose to not take a job, so you're not likely to get a good answer to that question.

That's why it's weird to hear that a candidate was told how many people were in the pipeline for a job ahead of them for a particular position; it invites those sorts of questions for which the company likely doesn't know the answer. That's the sort of mistake I'd expect from a local restaurant hiring a member of the wait staff, not from a corporate recruiter at a company with an HR department.