Hematite is one specific type of iron oxide. Rust is a non-technical umbrella term for all iron oxides, and the typical red ones we see in daily life are formed by contact with water and are not hematite. Hematite is a dark charcoal gray and is sometimes formed as a byproduct of iron ore processing or other heat and pressure processes in the ground, where oxygen may be present but not water.

That article is chock full of bullshit promulgated by right-wing organizations. But I'll quote one thing from it (note the lack of connection to H1B visas):

I believe that there is some fraud in the H1B system, but a lot less than other people would have you believe.

There is nothing stopping a second employer sponsoring a new H1B for someone who just entered the country on an H1B. No penalty today.

What does tend to stop H1B visa holders from transferring to a new employer are contracts that require the employee to repay moving and other costs: sometimes, somewhat inflated costs.

" (c) The restriction imposed pursuant to subsections (a) and (b) of this section shall not apply to any individual alien, all aliens working for a company, or all aliens working in an industry, if the Secretary of Homeland Security determines, in the Secretaryâ(TM)s discretion, that the hiring of such aliens to be employed as H-1B specialty occupation workers is in the national interest and does not pose a threat to the security or welfare of the United States."

Contribute to Trump or promote Trump and your company gets a waiver. "national interest" means "Trump's interest".

This is just more corruption, using a clear 1st amendment violation to enforce it.

They will accept higher costs due to delays and the like with offshoring, if those costs are less than paying the visa fees.

They will abandon paying Americans to do some of the work, and outsource all of it.

The reason this kind of scheme doesn't work is because the costs are different for every company. Some will pay it, some will do more offshoring, and a small number will employ more Americans. The only question is what the proportions will be, and which option your employer chooses. Hope you are in the last group.

Having used machine translation for years, I am well aware that it screws up. Even so, it's very useful and you get used to the mistakes it makes and learn to interpret them.

That said Google's English transcription is better than a human now, and IME is close to flawless. Meta's is probably a lot worse, but the potential is there.

Drones don't need air superiority to operate, they rely on numbers to overwhelm. At a recent arms show there was a company offering cardboard drones. Cost in monetary and material terms is getting so low that the challenge becomes mass producing them fast enough to swarm the enemy. Low flying, disposable, and very difficult to stop.

The important part is that they are talking about dye-sensitized solar cells (DSSC), not the typical solar panels you put on your house.

DSSCs are attractive because they are very easy and cheap to manufacture, and flexible. But they degrade fast with UV light, and the expected gains in protecting them have not been made. If their life could be extended to a usable amount they would offer an even lower cost option than already extremely cheap conventional solar cells, and open up some new applications.

Is NASA doing anything useful?

Aren't they just trying to repeat what SpaceX has already done?

I vote to call them the Sardaukar.

That depends on how much I'm paid.

For enough money, I can tolerate almost anything.

The truth is an absolute defense against libel in America.

It is a weaker defense in the UK.

Another difference is that in America, the burden of proof is on the plaintiff to show the statement is false. In the UK, the BOP is on the defendant to show the statement is true.

The arbitrator imposed the non-disparagement clause.

Sarah agreed to the arbitration process (she couldn't afford to do otherwise), but didn't specifically agree to the ND clause.

Doesn't seem unreasonable. Support Windows 7 with security patches. No need for things like driver or feature updates, just fixes for known security flaws.

It was never really about the capability of the hardware to run Windows 11, it was about Microsoft's desire to cut costs by not having to support it. Every supported configuration has to be tested, and if issues are found relating to 10 year old drivers, they have to be fixed.

What we really need is a law to set the minimum support term, say 10 years after the last official sale. For Windows 10 that would be 2031. Even that might not be enough though - both Microsoft and Apple are notorious for releasing updates that cripple performance on older hardware.