Wingdings would be keeping more in line with the current administration anyways

For that sort of wasteful spending I'd make an intentionally bad website that is sure to require additional funding and more billable hours just to bring it back to how it already was. Doing a good job within a reasonable agreed-upon budget is the worst possible way to make money as a consultant.

As a browser, yes. Now it's just a Chinese company trying to push a shit Chromium fork. Though to be fair, they hardly had any meaningful market share before either.

Because it's not so much an issue for the direct suppliers as it is for the rest of their supply chain. GM buys from Tier 1s who integrate components from Tier 2s - finding Tier 2s that are not Chinese is not too complicated, but the problem comes when you want to trace the entire supply chain from Tier 2 to Tier N (down to raw materials) and force the Tier 2s to diversify. IOW, it's not people like Amphenol/Molex/Rosenberger that are the issue, but their respective supply chains. In many cases the Tier 2s don't have end-to-end supply chain traceability at all, in others they are stuck in NDAs with their own suppliers which they can't kick back up to the next Tier, etc. They can certainly lean on the Tier 2s to find non-Chinese sources down to Tier N for better supply chain resiliency, but it will be a slow, iterative, and costly process. It's also not clear what the final BOM delta will look like, and whether this even leaves them with a margin that they can actionably go to market on. Full disclosure: I work for a large Tier 1 that is currently involved in these discussions.

I don't know why they can't just put more money into making a browser that isn't crap. This would seem to be easier than trying to pay people to use a garbage browser.

I only knew of Bixby as the Oracle interconnect. I wonder how Samsung has avoided getting sued, as the Nice classifications in their trademark filing do overlap to some extent.

"How can we make shipping slower, more expensive, and less reliable?"

Well, hopefully they've built in a grill or something so you can violently marinade and cook up some lovely sea creatures.

If they are doing the job and getting paid a salary, they're certainly not stealing the wages.

Boeing is at the very least a complete joke when it comes to quality/safety these days, so that's clearly a lesson that could have been learned and wasn't. I'd sooner fly on a decommissioned Tupolev.

And hate mongering Christians

TI might have something to say about that.

Ah, yes, blame the government for enforcing basic environmental standards and not the corporation trying to scam its way into appearing green. Carbon neutral isn't a fuzzy definition, whatever is produced must be offset in order to claim neutrality. In order for the purchased offsets to actually produce said offset, the trees must mature. If your company isn't willing to commit to the time needed to see the offsets realized, then they need a different offset scheme, need to make up the difference in manufacturing, or stop pretending like they're carbon neutral. But yes, let's keep blaming the government and fellating the corporation.

Itâ(TM)s a valid point. If you use AI to replace juniors and rely on seniors to make sure the AI isnâ(TM)t producing garbage, youâ(TM)re going to immediately run into issues when those seniors move on and the people coming in to replace them have no ability to provide checks and balances.

Using AI to help generate remedial code can be a good productivity boost, but expecting it to replace your workforce is ridiculously shortsighted.

And here's an article from a subsequent analysis 3 years after the article you cite, debunking the debunking and confirming that they are both female and most likely Earnhart's: https://journals.upress.ufl.ed...