Yes, but not for you and me. Graphics designers have been using stylus-displays for years and years, because it's great to draw on the thing you are making instead of drawing on a different surface like a Wacom.

But I'm like you, I don't have a use case for a touchscreen and if you touch my notebook screen I'll be angry because I prefer it without fingerprints, thanks. So my first question is: Do they offer this thing with OLED but without touch? I guess not. Pity.

I've been slowly moving towards my dream setup: Solar panels, battery, EV car, island mode capability. This is one thing that'd be a factor in my buying decision. Using your car as a battery or secondary battery is a big plus, and if they built the necessary equipment to run independent of the power grid, it'd come in a neat package.

While power failures are rare where I live, I expect them to become more common with the move to renewable energies. I support that, but it's more fragile than constantly running power stations. So being able to run your home at least for a few hours on your own energy is something that I consider a good idea.

I don't know why, but it looks like a cool background for a movie or series into credits.

Wow. a news for nerds story that is actually pretty damn cool. Even a summary that is interesting.

A one year series for calculus, physics, or chemistry, that's just the basics, nothing deep.
Most other core classes generally have one class on a topic. Maybe there is an advanced elective. How is that a deep dive?

By "deep dive" I am thinking at least a master's level where you spend a few quarters (or more) researching something. Or the master's version of the class picks up where the undergrad core and elective advanced left off. So you have to take that advanced elective if you did not have it as an undergrad.

Sure an undergrad class can be hard, or it can be a lab class that takes a lot of time, but that's not what I considered "deep". Getting a bachelors is really just basic proficiency in some field, qualified for more advanced studies or likely to be productive in the work force. Either of which will involve much more learning.

...then Alexa will make your vacuum cleaner trip you on the stairs

Maybe don't point it at the sticky notes on your screen or the bottom of your keyboard

To be honest, listening to Bank of America when they tell you to install their phone app and connect it to your accounts is really not the smartest thing to do either. A phone app should only see credit cards where you will not be held liable for false charges you report. Never an ATM card attacked to check or savings, or checking and savings themselves. And when only doing such credit cards you should really be using something like Apple or Google Wallet where there is some additional protection and an indirect connection to your bank, making the bank's own app unnecessary, and one less point of attack.

So change the coding interview to match what they will do on the job. If they aren't going to turn a requirement described in natural language into code that implements and tests that requirement, the test them on their ability to review a code implementation and the set of corresponding tests. The latter can provide some of the struggle they need to learn. And how well their code review goes can help distinguish between those that know more from those that know less. Those that actually debigged agentic code and those that just trust agentic code.

Or they just test the candidates using something other than a coding challenge.

The only sane way to do it is with a service like Plaid that tightly (and deterministically) controls what all any automated systems can do. Plaid is also jointly owned by many of the banks raising a red flag here.

Finally, good advice from too-big-to-fail banks. ;-)

You always have been.

I'll quote your domestic partner:

What would you even do with money? I've already stumbled across you before -- you're that guy who lives behind the carl's jr dumpster. I almost peed on you last weekend when the diner was closed and there weren't any other bathrooms around. The only place to go was your domicile and I didn't notice you were even there until you rolled over in your sleep. If you did that only a second later, you'd have woken up wondering why you're all wet when it hasn't been raining.

Our system of checks and balances has so far proven to be pretty resilient. You guys come and go, but after 250 years you've never succeeded at killing millions through either direct executions or starvation, or both, and not for a lack of trying. In fact, you never even make it anywhere close. Which one were you part of, by the way? Were you a weatherman? The family? Or perhaps ALF? Either way, you guys were the most active when the soviets were at their peak.

Nope. Business school is a graduate school. These people have both a Bachelors degree, 60% is a STEM field, plus some real world job experience.

Degree plus work experience is what is meant by "a background".

Nope. Not at the bachelor's level. The deep dive is for graduate school, MBA programs excluded (they are surveys of all the major fields of large organizations).

Nope. In business school getting separated into groups is for the permanent team assignments. With 5-6 person teams there is usually barely enough accounting background folks for one on each team. You see business school is very team oriented. Besides team projects a person with expertise in a given area is supposed to tutor teammates that are having problems with the material. So this distribution of backgrounds across the teams, at least one each of accounting, management, and STEM creates are broad enough set of capabilities for tutoring within the team.

Nope. The word "allegedly" means there is no evidence. Thank you for proving my point.