Very simply, their job is to make software, not promote or fight bigotry. There are dedicated organizations for that. Is a feather and the name Apache offensive? Unless you're a member of the Apache tribe, I don't honestly give a shit what you think. I'll let them decide. They have standing. I don't give a shit either way. I do care a lot about the Apache foundation as they've made many of my favorite tools.

Regarding Speedy Gonzales. Fuck the fuck off. Are you really that fucking ignorant? There are over 20 Hispanic countries, only 1 has standing in this debate. Saying Hispanics love a Mexican stereotype is like saying Europeans like Pepe Le Pew...how much do you care if the Bulgarians and Russians like him? As a partial Hispanic, I find it to be lame, but...I'm not Mexican nor have any Mexican heritage first of all and secondly, I have a million other things that upset me more that I think matter...but the same fucking principle applies. Do the Looney Tunes creators want to take a stand on lame, dated Mexican stereotypes?....or do they just want to delight children with cartoons? I'd wager they dropped it because they want the conversation to be how delightful Space Jam is and not people questioning if their cartoons are objectionable or not.

Regarding LatinX?...yeah...if you're used to speaking Spanish, you know it's odd and weird. It's lame...and stupid and a straw man. The Hispanic community has pushed back and frankly it's been half a decade since I've heard or read that word and even then...it was only in people making fun of it. However, you're building up a straw man because some rando on twitter decided the fundamentals of the Spanish language were offensive to them. So I'll push the question back to you...

Precisely who of power or relevance is pushing everyone to call people LatinX? I don't give a fuck what the mentally ill on the internet are getting upset about. Saying the "leftists" want to do anything is pure bullshit. First of all, using that word alone gives you away as a huge asshole...never heard a decent human being go around ranting about "leftists"...that's Breitbart echo chamber speak. It's not a term not used by anyone but online trolls. Certainly no one you describe as "leftist" uses that word.

Let's make a deal...how about you keep the conversation to relevant people in power or who have relevance and I won't bring up every irrelevant "conservative" in the KKK, Proud-Boys, or any other domestic terrorist organization...David Duke is not a figurehead of the Republican Party...and randos or substack that no one has heard of do not represent those who think the RNC is full of shit. Neither group speaks for the factions they claim to. If you're going to rant, stay on topic.

But it's not their problem to solve. The Apache Tribe is not involved one way or the other. This is a bunch of nerds who had nothing to do with the tribe and came up with a cute name when they were tiny and off the radar. Now they're a multi-million dollar organization. Culture war bullshit is a distraction from the mission of making great software.

Your bullshit is pushing your view on them. They don't want to be part of the discussion. They don't care which side is right...they just want to make software. You're concerned about which is the right side in the argument and they just want to leave.

Also, to your debate...I am not a member of the Apache Tribe...let's let them decide. So unless you're a tribe member, I suggest you shut up and stop speaking for them. If the ASF wanted to keep the logo and the tribe supported them, I'd support it. If they tribe thought it was offensive and should be changed, I'd defer to them. I don't really care what you think and no one should care what I think. Let's let those with standing decide.

Their job is to make software, not engage in culture wars. You're questioning if the complaints are valid...it doesn't matter...complaints, valid or invalid, distract from their mission. It would be stupid to continue offending people if you don't need to, even if those people are morons...better to avoid the debate, which has nothing to do with your mission....than proclaim that you're on the right side.

This debate is gross and stupid. ASF is a software organization. The name was cute in the 90s...but if people are complaining, even if they're morons, it's distracting from the mission. If I were in their shoes, I'd do the same. I don't want people debating my name and symbol. I want people enjoying my software and funding it's future. I don't want to offend people if I am wrong...I don't want to correct people if they're wrong. If I were running their org, I'd just want to make great software. They're an open source foundation, not culture warriors.

The thing about symbols is that it doesn't matter what the original meaning was or what you think it should be....perception is reality. If people perceive it to be bigoted...well...it's a symbol of bigotry. However, Apache is a serious software organization. Maybe they'd rather just move on and not deal with the pushback...even if you think those pushing back are morons...well...they're running a business and want to focus on delivering great software, not debating if their name and feather are offensive of not.

It's fair to assume it was measured the same way before and after. This is the ancient precision vs accuracy debate. For example, when you step on the scale...are you naked or clothed? Well if your weight went up 30lbs and you were clothed both times....you gained weight. Yeah, maybe the 2nd time you had a winter coat on, but it wasn't 30lbs worth. You're debating the accuracy. I am claiming accuracy doesn't matter, only precision. This study is only measuring relative use.

Also, addressing your point, who cares about unofficial use? Is Sam Altman going to buy his next yacht from the revenue from rogue employees paying money for AI tools without their employer's approval or knowledge?...I am sure the number is not zero, but I doubt it's nearly enough to keep the lights on for these companies with high burn rates.

These are marketed as business tools, not consumer ones. I think it's safe to say the business market matters A LOT more than the consumer side. Businesses will pay hundreds, even thousands of dollars per month to save labor costs....I don't think legions of rogue developers & professionals are plunking down huge amounts of cash to fund these companies.

You sound like an faith-based-AI practitioner....You're putting your faith in AI's glorious future and disregarding data that suggests otherwise. That's honestly OK...hope and optimism are good things, but (not sure if you're doing this) I get concerned when people ignore or dismiss data that doesn't fit their narrative. If you want the best outcome, you need to soberly evaluate the pros and cons...for the sake of those paying you.

There's a reason TIFF stands for Thousands of Incompatible File Formats. It's probably time to take TIFF behind the barn.

Vapes with replaceable 18650 tend to be higher quality and use safer IMR batteries (which also have lower internal resistance for a higher performance vape). Vape pens tend to be lower quality disposables powered by whatever was cheap when battery stocks got low at the factory. In part, that's because few will see the sealed in no-name battery.

Note that the popular 18650 is a little longer and thinner than a C battery and won't even fit in a vape pen. They're not absolutely impossible to short with keys but it's a bit of a challenge. The terminals are on opposite ends of a 65mm cylinder, not a quarter inch apart. They make silicone rubber socks that fit over the ends of spare 18650 batteries.

Many camera batteries are crazy over-priced and proprietary. To be fair, others are much more reasonable but still tend towards proprietary.

So yes, let's keep the red tape brigade on a leash for now. Let it get involved with SPECIFIC demonstrated problematic products.

You're debating the number. The point is however the number is calculated, it's declining. A decline of 35% is a decline of 35%, regardless of how the numbers are calcualted. So they reported using it before and changed their minds...sorry, that doesn't look good for the AI advocates. IMHO, AI is a religion...a belief in a better future while disregarding the present. LLM are just text prediction engines. They are far more useful than anyone guessed, but at the end of the day, they just guess the next word based on training sets. They don't think. IMHO, they have not demonstrated themselves as reliable enough to actually replace a human operator on any task I know of. They "could" be amazing someday and most advocates I know promise great things in the future while dismissing my concerns of how awful they perform today.

I use Claude 4.0 daily...officially blessed by my employer...to generate Java code. It literally can't match braces or put commas or semi-colons in the correct place reliably. I was very excited to get these tools and every day I use them I grow uncertain. I feel bullish when it actually does something right that saves me time, but I have to throw out it's answers the majority of the time and then feel bearish...and the cycle repeats often...optimism...then pessimism...and things haven't improved in the last year. I'd love for it to help me find bugs or make sense of our giant codebase or even something simple, like write a useful unit test. However, it only writes code that compiles approx 50% of the time.

I think many of the customers were excited for it's potential and then after using it, realized it's not useless, but Marc Beinhoff and Mark Zuckerberg are lying to you when they say their AIs can replace a mid-level facebook developer or most of salesforce's staff. It's extremely limited in use and very unreliable....and expensive. Everyone wants it to give them all the superpowers Jensen Huang or Sam Altman promises it will...it's exciting and worth every penny if it worked...then you try it out and realize it doesn't.

AI is a bubble. It's irrational exuberance and hope for the future. Eventually people will come to their senses and get a clear picture of what AI can do well and what it does poorly....and yeah, a lot are going to drop it. If it resembled working, adoption would rise, just like previous technological revolutions, like the internet, web 2.0, smart phones, big data, etc. AI looks a lot more like VR than the iPhone. Infinite theoretical potential, but limited real-world use and nearly all customers are enthusiasts. At best, it's a "someday" technology.

Will this change my tax exposure when providing 'gratuities' to supreme court justices?

We already have safer formulations. They fit the broad term Lithium Ion, but they don't tend to catch fire (or "vent with flame" as the industry prefers) even though some of them can actually provide more current to a dead short than regular Li-Ion can.

That depends on the formulation of the battery. There are several.

The problems tend to happen with the batteries that maximize capacity over safety crammed into a too-small space with cheap or absent protection circuitry.

Let's not roll out the red tape brigade prematurely here, it harms innovation and makes everything more expensive. For example, you can greatly reduce costs and regulatory friction with little effect on safety by exempting removable batteries (for example, camera batteries, flashlights with 18650 batteries). Those tend to be better quality and be better protected from damage. They're also avoided by the manufacturers that want to pinch every penny even at the cost of safety and reliability.

Meanwhile, 50 incidents only seems like a lot until you consider how many million person-flights there have been this year. That's not a call to do nothing, but most of this can be handled by air liners having a small metal box and an oven mitt on board. Also a place for the box next to an air outlet.

And hilariously, someone mad a mod for GTA (IIRC) to replace the grenades with Galaxy Notes.