The CEO has been given all sorts of impressive demos where it works well, so his view of the technology is skewed.

Add in that he's financially motivated to believe that they've created something amazing with all of their investment, and you have a recipe for someone to be very detached from reality.

In Canada it was a large anti-vax movement in religious communities in southern Alberta that caused their issues. Most of the far right stuff in Alberta is imported from the USA.

The anti-vax movement predates Trump, but his choice to pick an anti-vaxer to lead US public health certainly hasn't helped.

The lack of the one cross platform UI framework to rule them all can be a downside, as has Microsoft's adventures with creating and abandoning modern UI frameworks. But on the flip side this has led to a proliferation of third party options.

Avalonia works everywhere, and they recently made MAUI run on top of Avalonia to give it Linux and WebASM support. They also have a commercial product to run WPF cross platform using Avalonia. So not only do they provide a good option, they have made two of Microsoft's frameworks work cross platform as well.

Then there is Uno Platform, which is basically a cross platform WinUI implementation. There is also Eto.Forms if you want a simple desktop focused toolkit that wraps the native platform's widgets. There are also a lot of ways to bring Blazor to native applications. You can even use QT with QML.NET, though that isn't actively maintained.

It was simpler to choose a UI for C# in the early days. All you had was WinForms. Then for a while you had Winforms or WPF. Now this decade there is a pile of options.

It is surprising how common this is. I see complaints that CompanyX doesn't have an app, but when asked about what that app would do that the mobile friendly companyX.com website doesn't do they're not able to answer.

The one benefit to that is that it is easier to make it cross platform, but there are other ways to be cross platform without writing a web app. Unfortunately the largest (and often least expensive) set of developers know how to make websites and nothing else, so they make what they know.

You can't really blame application developers for not targeting native Windows anymore when even Microsoft doesn't use their own native frameworks to build applications. Outlook is now just a website inside a webview control, rather than a native app. Since they were already spending effort developing a web version of Outlook, this allowed them to converge the codebase and maintain just one Outlook rather a Windows app and a web app. It also means that it doesn't feel like a native application a lot of the time.

The same person who designed TypeScript also designed C#, so they have a lot of similarities. The main difference is that C# is compiled for its own runtime rather than being turned into Javascript and run by a web browser.

Part of that solution was that the US and Europe outsourced their manufacturing to Asia. So the emissions are counted as Asia's, but they are for producing goods for US and European companies that will be shipped back to those markets.

China in particular has increased their coal usage, but they've also substantially increased their renewable energy. The solar capacity added just this year in Asia is more than the total solar output of North America. China's mix of energy is cleaner now than before, but total energy usage has skyrocketed leading to greater emissions.

The problem is solvable, but countries need to care about solving it. Industry has helped to ensure the political will isn't there. The fact that we need every country on board makes it politically difficult. We could all learn from one another and do things to solve it, but will we?

Subject says it all

So there will be yet another rewrite of Outlook that makes it even worse. Maybe they can make it feel even less like a Windows application than it already does.

The human body generates more bio-electricity than a 120-volt battery and over 25,000 BTUs of body heat. Combined with a form of fusion, the machines have found all the energy they would ever need.

It can't get warmer if there is no thermometer to read.

It is the intense wealth those few people have that affords them that enormous power, so of course inequity is at the root of it.

You don't get an oligarchy if your economy doesn't allow for an obscene concentration of wealth. You certainly don't fix the problems caused by the oligarchy by continuing along a path where the wealth transfer continues to get historically bad year after year.

Exactly. We're heating the oceans rapidly, as well as changing their chemical composition. We're making it more acidic and adding toxins. We're doing it on a timeline that is much faster than evolution operates at.

Since coral is a fundamental part of ocean life, the consequences can be a lot worse than just the coral dying out. It could devastate most ocean life. Some life on land relies on ocean life, so the impacts would be planet wide. A comparable situation that is easier for us land dwellers to understand would be if we lost all forests by the end of the century.

A rational reaction to this science would be to do everything in our power to stop this from happening. If the study is right and we do nothing, we've already put things on a path towards eradicating most life on the planet. Whereas if we take urgent action and the study turns out to be wrong and the coral would've been fine either way, we will have "wasted" a lot of effort to save the coral but we will also have given ourselves a less polluted planet with a safer climate.

USB-C is nice when everything is brand new. Compact size, no worries about getting the direction right, etc. But then it gets dirty or wears out and the plug doesn't stay firmly in place.

Whereas USB-A just keeps on ticking, even though they typically get more usage since every time you plug something in it seems to take 2-3 attempts to get the orientation right.

Why are so many websites trying so hard to replace functionality that already works with a half-baked AI?

They're spending money on development time to create this feature, which then requires them to spend money on data centres to power this AI going forward. In the end they get a worse website that costs more to operate. How can this possibly be good business?