Common sense says if you have your staff prepare a document for court but you sign off on it, you are 100% responsible for everything in the same as if you did all the work yourself.

IANAL so I don't know if the actual law agrees with common sense. If it doesn't, change the law.

In the modern era, "AI" is the new "staff member."

Yep. Google, at least, started this transition during Trump1.

The company has long had engineering sites in various other countries, but until Trump1, the primary focus was always on cities where Google thought the global talent would want to live. Low cost was clearly not the driving factor in the selection of London, Zurich, Munich, Tokyo and Sydney, to name a few of the ones I visited. US sites were similarly not located in low-rent areas. The workforce was definitely global, because Google wanted to hire the smartest people and while the US does have its share of brilliant minds, the US has only 4% of the world's population, so most teams -- even in the US -- ended up being minority American.

During COVID, Trump leveraged the health crisis to essentially halt H-1B approvals and renewals. This caused significant problems for Google. My own team lost a few people because they couldn't get their visas renewed and had to go back home. Some chose to move to other Google sites overseas where Google could get them a work visa, others simply went back to their home countries. One trans woman on my team was in a particularly tough spot because her home country (India) refused to renew her passport because it didn't recognize her new gender. She couldn't get her visa renewed, couldn't go home to India, and also couldn't move to any other country with an expired passport. Luckily, she had a lot of nVidia and Google stock she'd been saving up to buy a house, and by cashing that out had enough free cash to get an EB-5 "investor" visa. It's good to be rich, of course.

Anyway, Google saw what was going on and, anticipating future troubles of the sort, refocused its overseas office plans on building up teams and infrastructure, especially in India which provided so much of Google's engineering talent anyway, with the intention of shifting whole projects and workstreams there. The company had long required a significant percentage of all staffing growth to be in the US (and especially in the bay area), but that policy was scrapped and replaced by its opposite: A certain percentage of all new roles must be based overseas.

It's still the case that the center-of-mass of Google is in the bay area, but the company is actively working to change that, to build up overseas capacity, and not just groups of junior engineers under a manager whose role is to pass them detailed requirements for implementation, but instead full teams with highly-skilled and experienced senior engineers and managers able to take full ownership of major product areas and move them forward.

Trump's latest moves will just accelerate this transition. The result will eventually be a hollowing out of the company's US capacity, and therefore a reduction in the need to hire American engineers. Lucky for me, I'm leaving Google for a startup and anyway am not far from retirement. Between this stuff and AI being poised to replace junior engineering staff it's a good time to be getting out.

Also, I think it will soon be time to start shifting investments out of the US.

Cppcheck doesn't flag anything in Waffle Iron's example.

It also doesn't find anything wrong with:

std::vector<int> vec = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5};
auto it = vec.begin();
vec.push_back(6);
std::cout << *it << std::endl;

Which is another common example of how you can write memory errors without using C++ pointers.

Sure, so C++ is safe as long as it's used in a way that makes it incredibly painful. Sounds good. Let's just require all C++ code everywhere to be written that way. Rust usage will skyrocket overnight.

He unintentionally used Signal? How drunk was he?

For a really rigorous definition of "fair", it's impossible to have fair democracy at all. Arrow's Theorem demonstrates this to a large degree, although many have argued that some of his fairness axioms are excessive. More recent research has concluded that fairness is the wrong standard, because there's no way for an electorate's "will" to really be fairly represented by any electoral system, not in all cases. Some systems can do better most of the time (and "winner take all" is particularly bad), but all systems fail in some cases.

What we need to aim for instead of fairness is "legitimacy", which is more about building broad acceptance of the system than about fixing the system itself, though it's easier to build acceptance for better-designed systems.

Having the country's top politicians continually claiming the system is unfair and rigged is, of course, the worst possible thing to do if you want to build support for the legitimacy of the system.

I decided to check :-)

According to the Book Censorship Database from the Every Library Institute, both "Of Mice and Men" and "Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" have been challenged, but only "Of Mice and Men" was removed, though "restricted" is more accurate. The Birdville Independent School District in Texas removed the book from general access, allowing access only to the AP English class, and the Indian River County Schools in Florida restricted it to high school students.

No Doctor Suess books were banned, although Suess Enterprises voluntarily ceased publication of six books.

That's one possibility. Another is that the companies will offshore the labor. Another is that they will simply shut down that part of their business because it's no longer economical.

That said, some jobs simply must be done and they must be done locally or in-country for an economy to funciton. If you don't grow your own food, someone has to transport it from the farm to your table. Some medical work simply must be done where the patient is. If you have roads, then repair crews must be local. Anything dealing with highly-classified/state-secret material should be done by loyal citizens of that country and, where possible, in the country itself.

You get the idea.

But most other jobs are vulnerable to either offshoring-to-cheaper-labor and/or we-can-do-without-it if local/domestic labor is too expensive.

There's a chain with stores in Idaho, Texas, Tennessee, and most states in between that rents, sells, and buys DVDs, Blu-rays, and more.

With the demands of life being what they are, this is much easier said than done.

If we are both 22, but you spent the last 4 years working on a political science degree and I spent the last 4 years working one or more no-post-high-school-education-required non-IT-related jobs, the answer will probably depend on the "prospects for advancement" in the company and whether those prospects would benefit from someone who had a 4-year non-technical degree.

If we are both 22 but you spent the last 4 years in something related to IT or to something else that gets the hiring manager's attention (say, we are applying for an IT job at a children's camp, and you've been doing children's-camp-ajacent work the last 4 years), you may have the leg up.

Unless you've got something equivalent or better to compensate.

Resume:

Work experience:

2020-2025 Senior Director of Widgets, Fortune 500 Company
2010-2020 Various positions of increasing responsibility in my parent's medium-sized Widget-making company, ending as Junior Vice President

Education:

2006-2010 Local High School, 4.0 GPA

In this case, the person had something unavailable to most: A guaranteed placement in a company that would nurture his career right out of high school. 10 years later he knew he had to leave the family business to broaden his horizons. By then, he was being recruited so finding a senior position with a big-name company wasn't hard.

Situations like these are unicorns, they are the exceptions that prove your rule.

"Working through school" is a good way to do it if you can swing it.

For some majors, undergraduate-research-assistant or industry-university-partnership between-semester jobs can help you graduate without any debt.

There are even some schools that have working during the school year to zero-out tuition as part of their educational model.

For decades until very recently, at degree that combined in-demand-upon-enrollment technical studies with a solid business education would meet this criteria. If your graduate date coincided with a "job bust" of your technical skills, you could fall back to your business education. If it didn't, you were still more valuable that someone with the technical skills but little or no business education.

I say "until very recently" because ChatGPT-style AI is very "disruptive" to the entry-level job market so it's too soon to say whether this is true for people who graduated in the last 2-3 years or who will be graduating in the near future.

The hard part is doing what amounts to a double-major (or more) without extending graduation (and tuition) more than a semester.

If you plan in "eventually" getting that degree, it's going to be easier to "go straight on through college after high school" than it will be to "work for a decade then go back."

Whether it's an apprenticeship, community college, a less-challenging college/major, or a hard-core-brain-buster degree, it's a lot easier to learn new things before mid-life than after. There's some brain science to back this up, but I don't have the references handy, sorry. Look up "fluid intelligence" and "crystallized intelligence" and their relationship to age.

For most people, it's also a lot easier to manage your time before you have a "full time job" or are raising children.

That's not to say you can't go back to school full-time to get your Ph.D. when you are 70, but it's going to be a lot easier if you do it earlier in life.