Some industries do it. Most run on standard schedules year-round, at least in the US.

Business drive personal schedules. Bigger businesses won't shift because it complicates internal work. That means smaller, local businesses largely won't shift because they often need to match their customers' hours. The end result is that people who are expected to show up at 8:00 for work now will still have to show up for 8:00 then, even if it's two hours before sunrise.

I credit most of SpaceX's success to CEO Gwen Shotwell. She keeps things going even when Musk is off on an irrelevant tear somewhere else.

Unfortunately, Musk seems to be on a path to sabotaging her efforts. The SpaceX prospectus showed that xAI (which bought Twitter, because why not?) was the reason they posted a loss in the last fiscal year. Even with all the expenditures on Starship, SpaceX would have been profitable. Like every other major AI company, it is not at all clear that xAI can reach profitability anytime in the near future, especially since xAI is blocked from so many enterprises and doesn't seem to be able to keep up with the big three at all. As Starship production scales up, the costs are going to increase, and they need payload revenue to offset those costs. There's so much focus now on the Pez dispenser and the lunar mission that I haven't seen any hints of the conventional payload delivery version (aka, "Chomper") in a couple of years. Maybe it's being quietly worked on. I hope so, because the big space station payloads that were talked about a few years ago will need it.

It seems like it should be just theming, but there's a separate architecture to it. Even the APIs are different, with new using a GraphQL-based API and old using a more traditional structure. The core data (users, posts, comments, etc.) is the same, but the pathways are completely different. New has links into capabilities that old doesn't have (especially around abuse and scraping), and old has capabilities that new doesn't always have (especially around mod tools, which new apparently breaks on a regular basis).

"Many users" is going to be relative. I saw some numbers recently that only around 1% of users go through Old Reddit, and in many of the largest subs, it's a fraction of a percent. I don't think it will have the impact that some people think. I prefer Old Reddit on desktop, but it's clunky on mobile, so I stick with the new interface (I don't use the app).

For global energy, that typically includes transportation. As more economies have expanded, there has been more use of cars, trucks, trains, ships, and aircraft, almost all of which are powered by fossil fuels.

Global electricity generation has changed. In 2000, 64.1% of global electricity came from fossil fuels, 16.7% came from nuclear, and 18.7% came from renewable. In 2023, despite overall electricity generation roughly doubling, fossil fuel generation was down to 60.1%, nuclear was down to 9.1%, and renewables were up to 30.23%. Looking at the renewable mixes, in 2000, it was 17.4% hydropower, 0.7% biofuels, 0.2% wind, 0.01% solar, and 0.3% geothermal. In 2023, it was 14.6% hydropower, 2.2% biofuels, 7.75% wind, 5.4% solar, and 0.3% geothermal.

That's still a lot of fossil fuel electricity generation, but it is declining by percentage and their growth curves are flattening. Renewables are up by quite a bit and still growing. Nuclear is declining, and isn't likely to recover in any meaningful numbers. This program is a lot like past programs meant to encourage new nuclear power plants. Odds are that maybe one will get started, and it might not get finished.

Construction isn't expected to start until 2030 at the earliest. From TFA:

By that time, the AI bubble may have burst, or the grid may have gone even further into renewables, or both.

We need more power, but nuclear isn't the way anymore. I was a supporter of nuclear until around 2020, when I saw how fast solar and wind were gaining. Both have consistently shown enormous growth because they are not as specific in their land requirements, can be installed in small numbers, and the levelized cost of energy (LCOE) for them has plummeted to become profitable even without subsidies. Storage is still a challenge, but we're seeing rapid improvements in that, too, with sodium batteries rapidly catching up in capacity.

TFA says that construction on these won't start until at least 2030, and if they make that, it would be amazingly fast for how reactors are built these days. In that time, wind is expected to expand by almost 50 GW and solar by 40 GW. Battery storage is expected to almost quadruple in that time. By the time the reactors are built, they will be a tiny fraction of the new power generation installed and they will probably be the most expensive part of it.

Been on Firefox since Quantum and got rid of Chrome when they blocked ublock origin a year ago when they forced you to turn on the flag.

Edge still supports it and it's sunset status is still TBD. If they're smart they'll keep it that way, since they can gain some share from this debacle.

I get what you're saying and believe me this college was anything but normal, but from what I seen it wasn't much different regardless of the college, it's size or student target.

Our college president at the time was nuts about studies and data. He did tons of studies and research of how students perceived us vs other colleges/universities. One of the studies I saw focused within a 250 mile radius of us and came back that we were the "safety college" when other colleges wouldn't accept them and we would be either their second or third choice. When you dug deeper into it, the students that did come to us didn't get accepted by 1 of 3 close to us large universities which I though was very odd because 1 of them (a very large Big10 state university) had satellite campuses all over the state (4 were in that radius alone) that was in the same boat we were in and were way under-enrolled, would accept anybody, and these satellite campuses were basically back doors to get into the main campus once you passed through freshman year.

Out of 40+ college and universities in that radius, only 5 were either at enrollment or were over-enrolled to the point where they were in a position to turn down students. 3 were large state universities and 2 were specialty universities larger than us. 2 colleges merged into 1 college due to dwindling enrollment. All of the rest were under-enrolled and ranged from being extremely small community colleges to state funded colleges easily 5 times our size. Price wise we were below average for our size and were best value ranked in US News and World Report at the time so cost wasn't considered a factor vs other colleges in our region.

The response by the president armed with all of this data was that we needed to stand out more from the crowd, offer incentives and postgraduate degrees and ultimately expand and focus on our strengths similar to a specialty university. Unfortunately the faculty heard him say the U word, freaked out, and he was gone by the end of that year.

Harvard is the exception. not the norm.

First off, they have a huge endowment. They could literally run their college for almost a decade on their endowment alone.
Second They have huge donors. Big shocker. Lawyers make a lot of money. And they like tax write offs. So they tend to donate to schools either directly or through scholarships to save tax money.
Third. Everybody and their dog that wants to be a lawyer wants to graduate from Harvard. They have a huge line of applicants at their door, so huge that only 4% of applicants get accepted. That way they can cherry pick the best of the best students to maximize both #1 and #2 and since it's such a privilege to get accepted there, nothing short of a nuclear holocaust will make a student drop out and lose his coveted spot forever, thus ultimately affecting final graduation rate.

That being said, very few colleges and universities have the luxury that Harvard (or Yale, Princeton, ETC) has when it comes to applicants. The college I worked for was a small religious oriented college with relatively large donors with at the time approximately 1000 students (out of 1500 max capacity) and declining. 25% of income spread across endowment, donations + scholarships, freshman students and all other students. When I left early 2010s their tuition was $30000 per year, with scholarships and student loans paying much of the tuition costs. Just about everyone that applied got accepted and the only reason they didn't enroll is because they got enrolled at the college they really wanted to go to. Most other competing colleges around us was in the same state we were, all competing for the same small number of undecided students left in the pool and would bend over backwards to attract them.

So if a student want's to pay $30000 a year so him and his basketball can get a well rounded college education, more power to him.

I'm sure the home automation / security wing will go bye bye as soon as this is finalized. At least you can go to Wyze since they were basically rebranded Wyze devices anyway.

Personally, I tended to recommend Roku streamers to my friends and family, primarily because they were stupid proof and had a long shelf life since they tend to support the older streamers for at least 10 years, unlike Google which reinvented their streaming platform 4 times (Google TV, Chromecast, Android TV, NEW Google TV) in the span where Roku finally stopped supporting their Roku 2's. Nvidia shields are way to expensive vs the other platforms. Fire sticks are an app desert unless you jailbreak them because of Amazon's insistence of supporting their archaic dead app store, and smart TV's (except for Roku's TV) tend to never see another update after their 2nd or 3rd year.

Roku as a company however was a dumpster fire. Between jailing their platform to starting quasi carriage disputes with app providers, their leadership brought them to the point where YouTube's app went dark and Smart TV companies threatened to all jump ship to Google's dumpster fire TV platform of the day until they finally backed off. So TLDR, they'll fit perfectly with Fox Execs.

IAI hasn't build a fighter since the Dagger/Nesher that Israel sold to Argentina after the IAF was done with them. They tried to build an F-16 competitor, the Lavi, but stopped when the US refused to allow any funding to be used towards its development.

Israel likely has the technical capability to build a modern fighter. Whether it has the money to do so on its own is an entirely other matter.

Because the College doesn't care but the kid. They care about the kid's money.

Most freshman don't get past their freshman year (over 50%) but since there's so many of them, they account for over 1/4 of the typical college budget. Considering that on average each freshman is worth about $40000 all you have to do is recruit 4 freshmen and you pay for an adjunct professor's salary.

My favorite story from my old college work days is how our college recruited a horse. Seriously. There was this freshman who was a valedictorian that was interested in our school because we (supposedly) had an equestrian program (we didn't but My Little Pony was all the rage at the time so we were working on it) but the student couldn't be away from their horse. So the college on the college dime transported the Horse from 5 states away and the College president's secretary boarded and fed the horse (again on the college dime) so they could recruit this student. Next year when the student also needed their dog in their dorm room on top of the horse the school finally put the hammer down and the student left for another school that apparently allowed their students to have animals everywhere. The horse of course had to be bussed back home again at school expense but they still broke even after transporting and feeding a horse. So as far as I'm concerned, the college recruited a horse.

And don't even get me started on Spalding, The world's most educated basketball.

I am reminded of some source code for a company-specific program that I saw in the late 1990s. I don't remember why I was perusing it, as I was in IT and absolutely not a developer. But I remember being tickled at one of the comments before a block of code. It was something like, "I have no idea why or how the following code works. But every time someone tries to change it, everything breaks, so please don't touch it."