That's what his advisors told him, go argue with them about it. I'm not sure who this "we" is, but that whole event was a huge international embarrassment to the government of Pakistan.

Iraq is a case of hindsight being 20/20. There are clear missteps for many things for sure, like enhanced interrogation. Just as a comparison, before the 2012 Osama Bin Laden raid, Obama was advised that they had a stronger case for WMDs in Iraq than they had evidence of where Osama was. Right or wrong, calls have to be made. Beyond that, Iraq was a bipartisan act of Congress.

You're always bashing America and Americans here, what did you expect? Respect is a two way street. And apparently we can take it, whereas you wildlings have very delicate skin. All somebody has to do is look at you the wrong way and you bleed.

Either way, you can relax in your igloo and take solace with the knowledge that nobody is going to send you to space, nor is anybody going to take away your seal club. The wildling went there voluntarily, not by force. He wasn't allowed to take his seal club, which I understand that to you is traumatizing, a bit like somebody cutting your balls off, but when you're going to space, every gram matters, and he'll get it back when he lands. And don't worry, when he returns home, he can have all the maple syrup that your government allocates to him from your strategic maple reserve.

Having said all of that, and more to the point, precisely how has this harmed you that made you feel the need to come here and complain about it?

So you're complaining about something that doesn't affect you in any way, shape, or form. Either that or you think wildlings are entitled to that money for some reason, even though they're not. The only connection you have to this whatsoever is America just sent the first wildling, ever, outside of the Earth's atmosphere, which entitles you to nothing.

It's a system of checks and balances. For example, how do you think we got rid of school prayer when the overwhelming majority of the country was in favor of it at the time? Because the constitution explicitly gave SCOTUS the power to do so. Not the voters, not the legislature.

Your king holds all of the checks. You're just relying on him to exercise restraint. You can't impeach him, and you can't veto him in any way.

So the only way to qualify as middle is to be able to afford two of the most expensive neighborhoods in the country? I tend to think "middle" or even "upper middle" would include a lot more than that.

This is a valid retort. But let us not think that lawyers are struggling: once they get to be a "partner" in a firm they are likely making $1 million/year. And the entire context of the discussion is that they aren't relying on staff like they used to. Back in 1980, a lawyer had staff members who ran down to the court house to get documents, bring them back, photocopy them, staple them, file them, make phone calls. Now all of that is 100% automated, plus now they have AI.

I'm not sure the legal overhead is quite what it used to be.

Disclaimers like this apply to Excel, TurboTax, GCC, ChatGPT, and more: The user is ultimately responsible for the application. The manufacturers always disclaim responsibility.

You can get companies to stand behind products and accept liability or sign a Business Associate Agreement - but you are going to have to put it in a contract and pay extra for it. This is why the product you buy at Home Depot and the one the government/military/NASA buys has a very big price difference even if it is the exact same part.

Every industry does this.

From Housing inspectors and plumbers, to software products - it is super common. I just had plumber put this into their contract for replacing a cast-iron drain with PVC. Then I had the tub reglazed and they did the same thing. There are often two prices, based on if you want a guarantee behind it or not. I paid a structural engineer to inspect the foundation of my prior to purchase. While he said the cracks were normal setting, the price was $200 for the inspection + verbal assessment, or $600 to put it in writing and stand behind it. In the last two weeks I've gotten this same thing from a tax preparer and a property attorney. Free advice from the tax preparer, but if we want him to file it and sign it there was a price. The attorney told me what to say in court, but quoted me a price to put it on his letterhead or to show up and say it.

1. Raw work: 8 hours
2. Work with unchecked AI: 8 minutes
3. Work with check AI: 16 minutes

I don't get why people choose option 2 over option 3.

They stocker making $15/hour needs to work extra hours to survive. Why does the lawyer making $500/hour overwork?

And yours is a monarchy, with the closest thing to a constitution only being a charter that only guarantees any rights at all to barons and nobles, whose descendants to this day still hold their titles and rights from ages past. The only thing it promises, but does not guarantee to you, is a jury trial. You guys sentenced Markus Meecham to jail and a fine en banc, putting a felony conviction over his head making him unemployable, over a youtube comedy that didn't involve any kind of violence or threats. The only way he makes a living at all is because he's paid by an American company to entertain his viewers.

And for voting...well...you don't even get to vote for your German head of state, who is not just for life, but by birthright to each successive generation he begets. Your prime minister legally only acts in an advisory role, who your king has the power to veto.

Anyway, how is ol' Boris doing?

I know a lot more about this subject than you do, Pootin.

Who's anus did you felch this turdbit from?

https://x.com/spacex/status/18...

Unlike you, I'm a strong believer in giving credit where credit is due, regardless of what else I think about whoever it goes to.

Without Elon there's no SpaceX. Full stop. He bet everything on it twice. And unlike you, it hasn't received *any* federal government subsidies either. The ESA, NASA, Rocketlab, Blue Origin, and many others were essentially betting against the idea of reusability, the ESA in particular making fun of the idea in a press statement, and Elon in particular who was the only one in the industry pushing hard for it, not only to the engineers, but investors. The rest is history.

Shit in one hand, wish in the other, and see which one fills up with what you consider to be edible faster.

I'm sure that where you're from, that's exactly what would happen. I'd bet on it, even.

Effectively the argument is that by doing a split, you're going to reduce the market cap, which is total nonsense. In fact, usually the exact opposite happens after a split.

There's no rhyme or reason to this argument whatsoever. You guys are just fucking dumb.