I mean China would actually benefit from a solid US economy as their economy has significant ties to US buying. They've been trying to move away from that for a decade but they still sell tons to the US. Up to 3% of their GDP is sold directly to the US and if you factor in rerouted products it's could be up to 5%. If you shave 5% off an economy that's pretty significant. I'm not saying they're doing this in an altruistic way or anything, but I think they probably though this through before pulling the trigger.

Welcome to 1984.

I only use Google to search and I don't see polymarket stories on gnews either. I think for Futurism because they're covering new technologies like Polymarket and Kalshi, they're getting fed those by the algorithm. Where I do see polymarket prominently featured is any Yahoo! News articles that I click into from gnews...

That's exactly right. All data centers pay by amount of bandwidth used + a flat maintenance fee for each circuit that is available to them. Network operators have basically not laid any new equipment because they've been pocketing the profits. When Google Fiber started laying fiber, all of a sudden all the ISPs started offering Gigabit service when they said it was impossible because of bandwidth constraints just a few month earlier. It really forced those ISPs to compete and lay new cables and upgrade service.

Just curious, why do you hate Chromecast?

Or added anti-trust lmao

I have a Pixel 3 XL that died to due to battery swelling recently (2 years). That phone was $950 + tax. There are only so many battery manufactures in the world and pretty much all smart phones use the same batteries (the technology is like 30 years old). It's not like a cheap phone will net you a shittier battery. It's only that it might be a smaller cell in terms of battery capacity, but it's ability to swell up or die on you, well, is about the same. Remember when they banned Samsung Galaxy Tabs from flights due to risk of catching fire. That phone was $1000+, but still had massive battery issues. So no, buying a lower end phone wouldn't cause them to not last as long. It's the battery, and it's not any better on the more expensive phone.

How much of the evaporated water is released into the atmosphere versus re-condensed? You are assuming that all of the evaporated water is somehow magically teleported into a black hole. If it's re-condensed, then it'll be pumped back out as reclaimed water. Even if it's released into the atmosphere, it will still re-condense and become rain. So at some point the water will be reused.

Evaporate yes, not boil. It would take ~183 megawatts of energy of boil 1 million gallons of water from 20C (and water in most reservoirs are cooler than that). Seems unlikely a single data center would have that much waste heat through out the day.

No, but it keeps 1 million+ gallon a day locked up in a data center instead of available for other users. It will reduce the amount of water in the reservoir but you are right, the water doesn't just disappear. It's just been move a different location. That could have environmental impacts if the volume is large enough. But in the largest reservoir in Mesa (Saguaro Lake) holds 22,540,700,000 gallons of water (that's 22.5 billion gallons), so 1 million gallon may look like a lot, but it's only 0.0044% of the water supply in a single reservoir; with 4 million gallons being 0.018% of the water in their largest reservoir. Even if this water is not potable after their use in the data center, you have the option to heat nearby buildings or using for irrigation later. It's not like Google is boiling the water. It's merely going from ~18C to like 25C. 25C is still pretty cool water (a nice hot shower is about 41C). (Where did I get the 25C number from, there was a study by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory that showed when the water cooling units failed, water temperatures didn't significantly rise above 25C https://www.datacenterknowledg...) This article is somewhat sensationalist and fits with the agenda that Bloomberg journalists seem to have. Pretty much every article I see in Bloomberg is Google is bad, Apple is somehow a saint...

Well technically the president must submit a budget for congress to then pass, so the President has a lot of say in what goes into the budget.

You can still sell the debt, it's not about a run on the banks. Agreed it's not good for China to do so, so it'd be like Thermonuclear option for them, but it would crush both economies if they were to dump all of their US debt holdings in one go.

By extension then every US based multinational and most companies in the US are treasonous. So Apple, Microsoft, Citigroup, Redbull, P&G, etc... Oh all the soybean farmers are probably committing treason too. Yeah, China buys the vast majority of Soybean grown by US farmers. Seems like a bad definition of Treason. Not to mention, under US constitution, that's not even the meaning of treason.