F-150 people don't strike me as the type to accept anything really innovative like the lightning. Ford should have stuck with their investment in Rivian which isn't trying to be something familiar. Same thing I find it appalling that Ford would make the Mustang a boring SUV crossover clearly aimed at boomers. I mean they've made the Mustang into the new Buick LaSabre. Not hating on the LaSabre, fine cars they are, but Ford wussed out and should have made their electric crossover a new line and let the car succeed on it's own merits.

Tesla has won their markets for electric cars, because they've gone big and it payed off. I'm keeping a close eye on Slate which fills a unique market, and if I wanted a fancy road princess truck or SUV I would go with a Rivian. I'd never buy a Nissan Leaf just because Nissan, so I feel like there is still competition in the low-end market.

Would you suggest using Chinese hosted data centers? Would you trust the CCP that much? US has issues, but there is not an equivalency in the least.

Most of the world died at the ripe old age of forty for centuries. Lack of food, not "chemicals", is a more common cause of death.

I agree, but like any kind of prisoner, they find a way around the system. iPads aren't banned, but still can do messaging and social media. Other issues include college courses requiring MFA, which is always a cell phone authentication app or text.

It is already censored. Try to post about June 6 Tiananmen Square and claim Taiwan is an independent country and that the Spratley Islands belong to the Philippines. The law is about keeping the CCP from censoring US media, and spying and tracking US citizens including journalists, politician, and military.

Nope, US laws are very different than EU.

> If AI displaces human labor entirely and no mechanism of redistribution is created, then there is no broad income base to sustain demand

I don't think this is true necessarily. Companies can invest in other companies. And those other companies can invest in other companies. And the government can provide loans to these companies to create new money and keep the cash flows moving along.

There isn't any actual need for raw labour or any sort of "redistribution" to move capital around.

Society has too high a standard for raising a child, and individuals can't see the benefits especially if they've come from a dysfunctional home. In addition folks are presented with a hypothetical cost of raising a child that is frankly absurd:

* You have to shelter and feed yourself. You _can_ fit more people so that expense doesn't count.
* You have to buy food for yourself. Food expenses don't increase in a linear manner as mouths increase.
* Public schools are free, and you aren't required to send anyone to a University.
* Child care doesn't have to be a pay-for service. Get creative.
* Shop at Goodwill first. Always.

I find having a family is overwhelmingly valuable, but also requires a giving mindset and some compromise. The value becomes more apparent as you age and all your older family and friends die off.

All these college grads who can't find jobs will in many cases start their own businesses. We've seen this cycle happen in the past. Except they will be leaner and more effective by leveraging AI/ML from the start and will operate without all the corporate baggage of C-suite staff with bloated salaries.

Even with great AI tools, you need competent people who can use them, and I'd suggest the young folks are going to have an advantage there. The companies that compete in the race to the bottom are sacrificing long term growth for short term gains in the name of making a quick buck.

As a Cigna customer, I can confirm they make a special effort to confound both customers, and medical billing offices to create "friction".

Personally I feel this deserves a class action lawsuit. Unfortunately I get whatever my employer provides, and that's that.

Yet another example of the Race to the Bottom, exemplified by Jack Welch running GE into the ground.

Take great brands that people trust, and slowly erode quality to increase profits until you've sucked up all the money and you're left with a dried-up husk of a company.

This smells like market manipulation. Imagine you're a feckless con that only cares about getting rich, and you're president. Have you and your friends pull money out of the stock market and put it into gold or crypto. Tank the market with tariffs, and then buy back into the market knowing that once you lift the tariffs everyone on the inside of this game will profit in a big way.

This is what Americans voted for. Choices have consequences folks.

This comment about DevOps and Ansible is worth unpacking a bit.

DevOps is a philosophy and a strategy for collaboration between development and operations, while Ansible is a tool for
automation. They are not substitutes for quality control, testing, or systems thinking. Effective DevOps requires a culture that
prioritizes reliability, safety, and design and it's up to an organization's leadership to promote that.

You're gonna start hearing a lot about this and soon.

Almost like using certificates with expirations when you have no automated solution to update them is a bad idea, and amounts to putting a time bomb in every product you ship.