I'm not making the argument dipshit. I'm pointing out that you made the argument. Herp Derp.

"And yet you cannot be bothered to show us even one.

I personally don't know a damn thing about her other than that she has showed bad judgement across large swaths of her life (hanging around Epstein, marrying Trump, staying married to Trump)."

Why would you suggest someone might have difficulty finding an example and then immediately cite three of them off the top of your head? I assure you there are plenty of other examples if you just do a modicum of research.

Legitimate weapons of war, like missiles, are properly placed on land-based MILITARY vehicles, sea-based MILITARY vessels, and MILITARY aircraft, which are clearly marked as military and with a nationality. This makes the situation obvious to any observer (friend or foe) and helps remove ambiguity from situations that might otherwise easily spiral out of control. Such systems can be observed, analyzed, counted, and regulated by arms treaties.

By developing missiles that would be camouflaged in standard shipping containers, the Chinese are placing themselves into WWII German territory...using apparently civilian vessels of commerce, which are actually armed warships in drag. The whole thing goes from nasty to global chaos when the people creating such stuff sell it on the open market to any belligerent who wants it, thus making ALL merchant vessels into suspected terrorist vessels. Nothing good can come of this.

The only appropriate response would be for every civilized nation to ban Chinese containers and container vessels from entering their waters and ports.

Is this "new and improved" Chinese military tech going to out-perform the junk they equipped Iran with before the current conflict? THAT stuff was NOT the bargain-basement consumer-grade TEMU stuff this is, and that higher-grade stuff failed utterly.

Have you bought stuff from China? Most of their vendors are about the initial sale with little regard to follow-up sales... so quality is generally not their "thing"

There's a general global failure to appreciate just how insanely capable most American platforms are. Most were developed during the Cold War (to fight the Soviets) or developed post Cold War with the rules and patterns developed during that conflict. One of the keys of US weapons development during that period was a near-paranoia about the quality and quantity of Soviet equipment. I know this first-hand. American Intel agencies were not nearly as good as they (and the other parts of the government that relied on them) thought they were. As a result, American systems were designed to fight much larger numbers of Soviet stuff than actually existed, AND much higher quality Soviet stuff manned by much better Soviet troops than actually existed. I personally had a security clearance that was high enough for me to see certain info on what we were sure the Soviets had (in a naval context) and I was stunned after the Soviet Union dissolved and things opened up to see that the info I'd seen as "certain" was in fact certainly completely WRONG. (and, NO, I'll not provide any details). My point is that Americans believing our most likely enemy in the next shooting war was much more capable than he was, combined with the post Pearl Harbor American paranoia about sneak attacks and being drawn into a conflict unprepared, led to a whole paradigm of weps designs the rest of the world does not yet fully grasp. We simply over-studied, over-planned and then over-designed everything at great cost. No other nation on Earth has done anything close to that.

Oh, and a little note about all the "hypersonic missile" scares: It suits certain defense contractors very well to have congress and voters think the US is behind in hypersonics and needs to spend billions on R&D to catch-up with this or that boogeyman enemy. To hear these people talk, you'd think China and Russia are WAY ahead of us in understanding flight in this aerospace regime, and we need to be spooked, like we were by Sputnik (and thus fire the money canon, showering them with cost-plus contracts of course). In truth, the US understands hypersonic flight vehicles better than any other nation on Earth, and the evidence has been right before everybody's eyes for DECADES. Look back to the X-15 flights (in one of which Neil Armstrong flew out of the atmosphere long before becoming an Astronaut and going to the moon) which were not small unmanned missiles but actually large manned planes that flew at hypersonic speeds. Then, for DECADES, right on TV for everybody to see, the US flew Space Shuttles (hypersonic manned vehicles the size of small airliners), with every single flight beginning its landing glide at Mach25, and every flight heavily instrumented. Tests were being performed on things like boundary layer tripping on these vehicles right up to the very last flight. That's a MOUNTAIN of data nobody else has, and nobody else has ever even had a way to obtain. Then, of course, we're not even talking about classified programs, which are ALWAYS going on in the US....

Rob Reiner had talent, no one denies that - he also turned into a raging political gate-spewing jerk as he qualified for an AARP membership.

He made many excellent movies, more than I can count on both hands, but towards the end... uh, he was 'polarizing'

Not huge enough to turn a profit. Not huge enough to keep him on the air. But sure, it's 'huge'.

I suspect his foray into screenwriting is to keep him occupied/employed as he rides out a non-compete clause that will keep him off TV for a year or more... that's just a hunch, and that this project started to take form before his cancellation was announced works against my hunch, but honestly, it think it went from fun idea to kick-around with Jackson to a possible job once he found out his show was being cancelled.

You may want to explore the decision to cancel Late Night w/ Colbert - a show that loses tens of millions of dollars a year doesn't need government interference to be cancelled.

I suspect the reason Colbert is still on the air today, finishing out the season, is because the network would probably lose as much (or more) in severance packages to various staff, talent, the production company and the affiliates that would suddenly have a 90 minute hole in their schedule.. That and at the time of the decision they had nothing to put in it's place...

Look at the cost, look at the ratings, look at the contracts involved - its was nothing more than a solid business decision.

Writing a segment for "The Daily Show" or a monologue for "The Colbert Report" is one thing, writing (or having significant input) into a quarter-billion dollar project is a bit different.

He's teamed up with his son, and other successful screen writers, so it's not like he'll be writing the adaptation of the six chapters he loves so much by himself.

Remind me, how big is his writing staff on his current interview/entertainment show? My research indicates he has a writing staff of about 20.

I question how much writing he's done since he 'broke out' as a celebrity on "The Daily Show"...

He's got some comedic talent to be sure, but this isn't going to be a comedy movie, is it?

You realize that this change has zero effect on any router, no matter its country of origin, that was on the market last Friday (before this change went into effect) will still be available for as long as the MFG chooses to keep selling them, right?

https://docs.fcc.gov/public/at...

Lost in the story, every currently approved router is unaffected:

Source: FACT SHEET: FCC Updates Covered List to Include Foreign-Made
Consumer Routers, Prohibiting Approval of New Models

This order only impacts new routers.

Is the "Fossil Fuel Industry" actually responsible for "almost 90% of CO2 emissions" or are the customers that buy the fossil fuels and turn them into CO2 emissions responsible?

I think the issue is the consumer, not the producer...

Trump admin is simply returning the money TotalEnergies paid the Biden Admin for some off-shore windmill leases. Seems reasonable to me, the company has found something else to do with the money.

The Government is simply refunding the money the French company already paid for the leases.

Please, explain.

While heterosexual marriages are comprised of both a man and a woman, and a gay marriage involves two men, are you saying that lesbian marriages are much more likely to end in divorce than both 'straight' and 'gay (2 men)' marriages?

Interesting.

We live in a world where people avoid thinking about the most important things and fantasize about becoming millionaires or billionaires. Who hasn't thought about how great their lives would be if only they had a billion dollars? Money is certainly helpful. It enables one to do many things and it helps reduce all the little concerns of life, but it cannot remove the big hazards, and indeed people with mountains of the stuff gain lots of other problems along with it (like security concerns, and difficulty knowing if people like THEM or just their money). Money buys a lot, but not everything, and often not the most important things.

Paul Allen... death by cancer

Steve Jobs... death by cancer

This guy... same thing

People have often warned that "you can't take it with you" and "you never see a U-Haul trailer on towed by a hearse" and these do make a point. What's also true, however, is that even mountains of money often cannot solve particular problems while one is alive. Keep things in perspective, and don't waste time on things like envy.

What should Waymo do in such cases?

Drive away, potentially hitting/injuring the attacker?

Deploy some anti-attacker device, say a loud noise, blinding lights, noxious gas, tear gas, etc?

Provide defensive weapons to the passengers?

Seriously, what is Waymo supposed to do? It's easy to say "they should do more", but I want to know what, specifically, they should/could do...