The law is unconstitutional, as other similar laws have been found in the past. It hasn't been removed from the books only because nobody has been charged for it in a century, thus nobody has had a chance to challenge it on those grounds. The exception is for the military, which has the UMC which is allowed to have stricter restrictions on behavior.

YEah, none of this will happen. Let's assume they don't have a prenup (in which case the settlement of assets is dictated by that). The wife would get 50% of what was generated during their marriage at best. That may include the house, but its value would be subtracted from what she got in cash. Alimony... depends on a lot of circumstances, but it's more rare and generally a limited time. Plus we have no idea what the wife's income is, she may make as much or more.

Will he get a job again? Of course he will. Probably not as a CEO in the near term, but he'll absolutely get jobs where he isn't a visible presence for the company. And in a few years the CEO jobs will open again, because nobody is going to give a fuck a year from now.

As for going to jail- no. If the alimony (which is unlikely to exist) does exist and it is set high, he goes back to court to get it lowered. Because alimony is based on your income (with a few exceptions for example purposefully staying unemployed). Given that he was just publicly fired, his current income potential is very low, so any alimony would be matchingly low. There are formulas for these things.

So in other words, your just spouting misogynistic bullshit.

No, it's not. Thinking requires understanding. Machines are incapable of doing that. They can recombine new facts, but they cannot and will never be able to think.

The cognitive ability of AIs is 0. AIs do not think. They do not reason. They do not understand. They can probablistically predict output based on training data, and an input, and that's it. With programming, it can find bits of code on the internet that are related to the keywords you give it, but it can't actually code a damn thing on its own. Which makes it a slightly less useful version of stack overflow, and for it ever to become better it will need a quantum leap of new techniques that are not currently on the horizon.

Not all the world is the US. In the US, you're relatively safe... well at least as long as you were born a US national, it seems we're deporting those who aren't. And we'll see where that trendline goes.

Other nations outside the US and EU? Safety varies a lot. There are plenty of governments happy to punish or disappear protest starters.

Except this wouldn't actually solve this. You'd be able to share the business logic, which would be a benefit. But you wouldn't be able to share any of the UI, system, or OS interaction code which is where all the incompatibilities come. If you just wanted to share business logic, there were already ways you could do that (write it in C would be one way).

Also, if they really wanted to do that, they should consider going the opposite way and bringing Kotlin to Swift. Kotlin also has a significant server side use that's growing (mainly by replacing Java), Swift is iOS and Mac only. They'll find a lot more people willing to learn Kotlin than Swift. Of course Apple won't consider that due to NIH and control issues.

Not always possible. And even when it is, nothing is assured. I've checked in within 1 minute of the start period and had over 100 people ahead of me. Unassigned seating is absolutely the reason I refuse to fly southwest, I will happily pay more to assure I get my aisle seat.

Nobody I know who used an Oculus even wants one of those. VR got hyped for a moment then died yet again. Its still a solution looking for a problem. It doesn't work for AR (which require you to actually see the world) and VR is a niche thing that most gamers don't even want, and that's its only usecase.

Mein Kampf and The Communist Manifesto were both written by people who claimed to be experts. Claiming that some book written by some nutjob is spouting bullshit doesn't make it true. Which in your heart you know, which is why you're talking about a book without citing any of the facts or arguments the book provides.

You can have a walled garden with Apple or Google. Just stay with their ecosystem. Forced walled gardens on hardware you bought are anti-consumer, anti-competitive, and should be illegal. If you want that, your choice is to buy whichever you want and just never install another app store.

It goes beyond cities. Some neighborhoods have specific taxes/fees to pay for local improvements. Figuring out the tax rate at a particular location is actually a business in and of itself.

No, your AppleID and GoogleID only serve this purpose if you're stupid enough to allow it to. And they can (and do) do the same thing on desktops. And yes, my windows machine can and does receive all the notifications my Android phone does. You're just making shit up.

The only difference between a phone and a computer is the phone has a cellular radio in it. And that's not even 100%- an Android tablet may not have a cellular radio, and I've had laptops that did.

No, you should have a choice to be in a walled garden or not on any device. Now if you like Apple's garden, that's fine. Don't install any other app store. I expect that's the route the vast majority would go. But there's no reason to tie hardware choice to the store choice. And allowing them to do so is anti-competitive, dangerous to the market for software makers (Apple has many time banned apps because they decided they wanted to make a similar app), and causes increased prices for consumers (there's no competition on those percentage cuts by Apple). Not allowing competition harms the consumer, with no benefit.

They don't low ball the instant win because of social engineering. They do it because they don't want the player to take it. Going for the big prize is better TV. The low balling is just to make it more enticing (and also mathematically wrong) to stop. The game show doesn't even care, they buy insurance to cover the prize payment.

Not just AI, but everything. There's an old story about how Ken Thompson (inventor of Unix) once wrote a compiler that recognized the code for a login function and had it automatically inject a backdoor in the compiled output. https://wiki.c2.com/?TheKenTho... So yes, you need to be able to trust your tools. And yet another reason to carefully read and understand what code does, no matter what the source.