Their kids didn't. Treating everyone like an island is ultimately the purest form of the cancer that infects the US.

"those goals seem to be nearly impossible to attain"

Is it impossible to obtain - the national ethos sees absolutely no problem with the unbounded consolidation of wealth and power, so long as it is in the private sector.

The joke is the private sector is so powerful at this point, your public sector is just a sock with the private sector's hand up its ass.

That'll never change as long as the concept of even moderate, reasonable redistribution of wealth is a national non-starter. It's impressive watching the way the US twists itself this way and that, where everybody is just a temporarily embarrassed billionaire voting for less taxes, less spending to make their supposed future rich selves happy for when they finally join the billionaire class.

"Sane people use C for that" for embedded systems? That's a very "all i know I leaned from Slashdot" definition of embedded systems you must have

Dunno if you're a programmer or not, but if you're not extensively testing and verifying what you wrote before you put it in production, you're doing it wrong.

You have to verify and test *all* code. LLMs are great for producing a bunch of boiler plate code that would take a long time to write and is easily testable. The claim that LLMs are useless for programming flies in the face of everything happening in the ivoriest of towers of programming these days. Professionals in every major shop in the world use it now as appropriate. Sorry that makes you mad. I'm not young either. I've been producing C++ on embedded systems used by millions of people for 20+ years. Nobody doing serious programming takes the "LLMs are useless" opinion seriously anymore.

How would you know what a shot number was? If the goal was to restore flowing traffic, reduce horn honking from standstill traffic, increase city revenue for mass transit, seems like a decidedly non-shit number to me. You dont need to cut traffic in half to make the roads work, a modest decrease from full capacity will do it.

I don't even own a TV!

*wanking motion*

"Oil companies didn't create the emissions, people did. We're the one setting their product on fire."

Speaking of weapons level stupid ...

"To cease all production and consign us all to a pre-industrial way of living? "

This is weapons level stupid and or disingenuous. Do you actually think a) that's the point of the suit b) the person who filed it wants that?

It's mostly a bad idea because it will not succeed, and in the current judicial climate (no pun intended) of the USA may very well set some kind of precent at complete odds with the goal of the lawsuit.

And I say this as somebody who thinks the people behind such a lawsuit are not in it for money or notoriety or whatever. People can be driven by emotion for certain things that are right - you know, like if your mom died on a night that was substantially warmer than you remember experiencing when you were a kid. Suing oil companies could *very well* help with "the transition" as you call it, if only to decimate their ability to lobby for policy - people really don't understand how subsidized their industry is.

None the less, what appears to really sell right now in the US is antagonization so here we are. It's somehow "our fault" witch to me smacks of somebody who really isn't particularly interested in the larger scale details.

That's a very naive understanding of how things operate in courts of law.

"yes we were already doing most of that that, but .. uh .. now we're doing that for you, Mr Trump! Here's a nice press release for you, your favorite kind of release! Please be nice to us!"

Yes, as we know humans never make nullptr deref bugs.

No matter how much Microsoft tweaks up the X-Box hardware, it is still not a Playstation or Nintendo console. Those have the games people want to play.

When you're the size of Google, of course you can have it both ways. What's the entire point of effectively legalized regulatory capture if not the privilege of having it both (or 5 or 10 or N) ways?

Uh, debit cards do all those things. Only you don't have to engage in all the "make work" that middlemen loyalty programs incur. You spend money, it comes out of the money you have, it's a card. The merchant doesn't have to pay anybody to run a loyalty program, and then pass the costs on to you. The end.

So what do you get from using a credit card if you always pay it off? Are you magically always one month behind being able to afford anything?

I'm guessing it's not that. Do you get points? Services? Goodies? I wonder how credit card companies pay for those? Oh yeah, you pay for them - and that's even if you use the stuff that comes "with" credit cards. Truly the ultimate middleman/redistribution scheme.