If by simple, you mean simplistic, then yeah. What you're forgetting is that every time a bomb kills someone's mother, father, brother, sister, wife, son, or daughter, another America hater is born. So there's likely to be an endless supply of irrational leaders, so long as they are put into power by someone bombing the previous leader along with random military targets.

The only regime changes that are ever really positive long-term are regime changes led by the people of a country against their leaders. All other regime changes are statistically more likely to make things worse than better.

Complete 24/7 tracking of you as an individual. They have to have a unique identifier for you and it has to be stored somewhere for this to work.

And we are just letting it happen because why the fuck not? Any politicians it's going to oppose this is also not going to play into our love of moral panics and knee-jerk reactions. Making them completely non-viable.

If you give Windows 11 less than 16 GB you might as well not bother booting it. It is painfully slow and that's why you're not seeing 8 GB Windows laptops even though apple is out there selling in 8 GB laptop that's threatening the entire industry.

And honestly you really really want 32 GB for Windows 11 and 64 GB wouldn't hurt. It's one of the reasons the Damned ram crisis is so bad. Microsoft guzzles RAM for their slop generators and monitoring software. As a consumer if you're stuck running Windows you have to pay for all that in CPU cycles and RAM.

Let me restate that. Most of what makes neighborhood streets dangerous is vehicles and pedestrians using the same space at similar times.

Who has priority is largely uninteresting, because ultimately if a car hits you, you're still probably dead whether you had the right of way or not.

Ostensibly, sure, if you got rid of all the cars, streets would be safer for pedestrians, but they would also be a huge waste of space, because pedestrians don't need huge roads to walk. Roads exist principally for cars. The fact that pedestrians have to cross them is just an unfortunate design constraint that's hard to avoid cheaply, and giving pedestrians priority is mostly just feel-good policymaking that doesn't solve any of the fundamental problems.

The only truly safe way to share the space is to ensure that pedestrians aren't in the road when cars are. The best approach, at least in cities, is second-floor walkways, so that pedestrians and cars are never vertically at the same traffic layer. A slightly less optimal, but still reasonable approach is to give pedestrians a separate walk cycle in which the entire intersection is theirs. Pedestrians have priority during that cycle, and cars have priority the rest of the time, and as long as everyone follows the rules, nobody gets hurt.

But none of those solutions work for neighborhood streets, which is why the presence of pedestrians on neighborhood streets without sidewalks and proper traffic control for pedestrians results in the roads being inherently more dangerous than other streets.

Amazon will replace workers with robots the second it is feasible. This won't do anything to change that.

Is there any risk of being caught in the lie? Here it's possible that your employer will get at least a sense of your previous salary because they need to handle income taxes for that year.

I do it anyway and it's never backfired, but I suppose in theory...

Our intelligence agencies are going to be leaking like a sieve. The last time Trump was President the number of captured and killed intelligence assets skyrocketed. I haven't been monitoring at this time but I'm sure it's shot up again. Never mind the fact that we found out Trump was taking classified documents related to his businesses.

What pisses me off is the Democrats kept putting Republicans in charge of prosecuting Trump because they were so desperate to appear unbiased. Fuck that shit look where it got us. Tons of dead soldiers and we are probably going to put boots on the ground and do a draft soon. Because Iran isn't Iraq. We do not have the troops to occupy Iran. That's based on the pentagon's own math and that math is well tested and well understood.

Not that it matters to any of the old farts around here. None of us are going to get drafted and we know it.

That's a violation of international law. And yeah we are the baddies. If we weren't the Republican party poll numbers would be so low that they would remove Trump from office immediately just like they did with Richard Nixon.

Bombing people doesn't really help them.

I see Israel has started its usual tactics of destroying all the civilian infrastructure in Lebanon, in preparation for annexing part of it.

Robots are coming no matter what. There's no accelerating it anymore than it can be. The ruling class, the Epstein class is tired of being dependent on employees and they don't give a rats buttered behind what it costs. The only thing stopping them from automating everything is they haven't quite worked out how to do it yet. Cost is not a factor anymore. They don't want you. They don't want you as a consumer and they especially don't want you as an employee.

The Old Kings had a Divine right. The Epstein class wants that back.

Ai and robots are coming no matter what because the ruling class doesn't like being dependent on us filthy filthy consumers and employees.

They will spend any amount of money to eliminate you from the economy. And we gave them all the money because of sentiments like yours.

I get that you are trolling because it's fun but the thing is they are coming for you and all of us. The sooner you come to terms with that the better.

Assuming you're not ancient Boomer trash. In which case you get to die leaving everybody else to deal with the mess you made. I'm not exactly happy with older Gen x either. They gave us war in Iran along with the help of the boomers...

I have known several people that got upset when minimum wage went up because it made it feel like they were earning less money...

People are dumb. Really dumb.

Attacking nuclear facilities is at least moderately rational. Various countries have done that half a dozen times over the past few years. Attacking drone manufacturing and storage might also be reasonable.

But...

What does an illegal decapitation attack have to do with nukes? Do you think the new supreme leader is going to somehow be more rational than the last one? There is a fundamental difference between going after clear military targets to prevent Iran from developing weapons that threaten their neighbors and going after civilian and government targets.

No, they will keep doing this until they are a nuclear power. They've seen what denuclearization did for Ukraine, and it's hard to argue with their logic. Having nuclear weapons is a strong deterrent to invaders, who realize that the response could be swift and devastating at a scale that countries never recover from.

It's unclear what other things they will do at that point. We can only speculate. Mind you, I don't like the idea of a nuclear-armed Iran, but again, I see no evidence that anything happening over there right now is going to change anything, or even delay it enough to matter.

Is anything that the U.S. government is doing right now going to change that reality? The way you prevent them from laying mines is the same way that you prevent oil from leaving Iran — bombing ships the second they leave the harbor. If you're not willing to start with a full air and naval blockade, you've already failed, and the only thing continuing the war can do is increase the number of ways that you've failed.

My AI says there aren't enough em dashes, so you're probably both wrong.

At 3 A.M.? Probably. At 3 P.M.? Unlikely.

Most of what makes neighborhood streets dangerous is pedestrians. After dark, this concern goes way down. At some point, it becomes effectively zero, and the only thing increasing the risk is the number of driveway entrances, and in particular, blind driveway entrances.

And, of course, the presence of small children who behave erratically. In general, you should drive those speeds whenever you see evidence that small children are playing or are likely to be playing anyway, e.g. when driving past parks before sunset, when you see small children walking down the sidewalk while tossing a ball back and forth, etc.

And when there's no evidence of children, it doesn't make sense to slow down nearly as much.

Cyclists and pedestrians are also a big risk. They often behave in unpredictable ways. Also, if you pull out in front of cyclists, this is a very bad thing. But all of those factors are also highly timing-dependent. When there are no cyclists nearby, a road can be 45 MPH, but when cyclists are nearby, you need to slow down. Drivers need to have the situational awareness to realize that driving at the speed limit is not always safe, because the alternative is for the speed limits to be set so low that they are always safe, which results in miserably slow roads.

I've heard of neighborhoods pushing for 5 MPH (8 KPH) speed limits. When cyclists and even some pedestrians would be ticketed for exceeding the speed limit, you're doing it wrong. Even at 15MPH, there's only a 9% chance of an accident seriously hurting a pedestrian even if you don't slow down at all, so the benefit would only come from drivers who are completely not paying attention, and would likely be cancelled out by a higher number of drivers zoning out and not paying attention, in which case the chances of pulling out in front of a cyclist (who realistically won't be going that slowly) goes up. No free lunch. But that doesn't keep people who don't understand statistics from saying "If 25 (residential default) is good, 5 is better."