You would need to add at least a couple of 0s for it to even begin to seem reasonable.

The term "thread" in this context is older than Slashdot. It originated on usenet, before the web existed.

> "Proves" might be too strong

Different fields have different standards of proof. The most rigorous that I'm aware of, is in mathematics, wherein a proposal that almost all the experts think must surely end up being true, can be heavily studied and yet remain "unproven" for an arbitrarily large number of centuries, until eventually someone finds an actual real-world use case for the math that you get if it's NOT true. (The poster child for this is non-Euclidean geometry, but there are lots of other examples.)

There's an old joke about three university professors from England who took a trip up north together, and on their way out of the train station, the journalism professor looked over at some livestock grazing on a hill, and said, "Oh, look, the sheep in Scotland are black!" The biology professor corrected him, "Some of the sheep in Scotland are black." But the math professor said, "There exist at least three ship in Scotland, and at least three of them appear black on at least one side, at least some of the time."

Sorry, no, that isn't the issue either. The problem the OP is running into is much, much more basic than that.

Forget, for a moment, that the ports are USB ports, and that the peripherals are USB peripherals, because as long as they match up (which they do, in the OP's scenario), none of that is the problem. The number of ports doesn't even matter, we can abstract away the 4 (or 2 + 2, same difference) and just call it N. The problem is that he's got N ports, and N peripherals that he wants to keep plugged into ports all the time, and that leaves N - N ports available to plug anything else into, if he needs to plug something in temporarily. But N - N is 0, so something has to be unplugged to free one up. That's a number-of-ports problem, entirely irrespective of the port type.

If you were proposing replacing the 2 USB-A ports with a *larger* number of USB-C ports, then your argument might have some relevance. But just changing the type of port won't bend the arithmetic in any useful direction. They could be upgraded to the new USB type K ports introduced in 2042, and it still wouldn't solve the problem: if there are still four ports and four all-the-type peripherals, there still won't be any unoccupied ports available for temporarily plugging in transitory things.

At least USB is (mostly) hot-pluggable. But, again, that's as true of A as it is of C.

Don't see too many cars on walking paths and sidewalks. The number of e-bikes on walking paths and sidewalks has skyrocketed. It's almost as if someone decided being a pedestrian is a sinful activity, and that every walkway must now be infested with morons on wheels.

Then let me get started on mobility scooters.

I'd just like them banned from walking paths. At least once a day I'm getting some crazy asshole ringing his bell as he comes flying up behind me. I'm not a fan of any kind of bike on walking paths, but at least the people on regular bikes have more control. The worst are probably older riders who often seem like they're barely in control. And the three wheeled ones take up outrageous amounts of space on smaller paths, regularly forcing other users on some of the narrower paths I frequent to get to the side of the road.

It's hard to imagine, short of motor vehicles, anything more hazardous to a pedestrian than some stupid prick on an e-bike.

Socialism with American Characteristics

Iowa's rolling farm fields of coffee

Indeed, I fully agree. The funny thing is, monthly numbers would help us move away from the distortions of the quarterly cycle. If key data reporting becomes frequent enough, you can't get into a cycle of "do adverse-numbers stuff early in the quarter and then cram positive-numbers stuff into the end of the quarter". You have to - *gasp* - just run your business normally.

Some businesses could still manage to switch to a monthly cycle, but anyone who deals significantly in transoceanic feedstocks/parts/goods shipments won't be able to.

BLS numbers aren't some sort of dark art. They're literally just the compiled numbers reported by companies. Numbers are what they are. To fight against jobs numbers is to fight against reality.

People get confused by the existence of revisions. The problem is that not all data gets reported in a timely manner. When late data comes in, it causes revisions to the earlier reported numbers, either up or down.

Firing the head of the BLS because you don't like what numbers US companies reported is just insane Banana Republic-level nonsense.

This has probably changed over time. My impression when I was taking college entrance tests, was that the ACT tested what you knew (i.e., memorized facts), but the SAT tested _how you think_ (i.e., how good you were at figuring things out). But that was in the early nineties, and they changed some things not very much later that, among other things, resulted in more students getting higher scores, which I think was the goal then too. They had a lengthy explanation about keeping the test relevant to the changing expectations of modern institutions of higher learning, but reading between the lines, it seemed like the main outcome was giving out higher scores.

Yes, he fired the same person who was ultimately responsible for putting out crap numbers.

US reporting has always been the gold standard. Nobody has accused the BLS of "crap numbers" until Trump decided he didn't like them. It's is so way outside the norms it doesn't even resemble something that could conceivably happen in the US; this is banana republic-level stuff.

Yeah, as an investor, my reaction to this proposal was, oh HELL no.

TL / DR:

BLS chief: "Jobs are turning bad now."

Trump: "Fake news, you're fired. I'm appointing a January 6th rioter conspiracy theorist to head the BLS!"

BLS today: "Jobs were ALREADY bad!"

The fact that you take at face value a revision of Biden-era job numbers, immediately after Trump fired and replaced the BLS chief explicitly because he published jobs numbers Trump didn't like, is....

Well, it's certainly a choice.