There isn't this massive change where suddenly we went from fairies and unicorns to Mordor. Trump himself is far more authoritarian than the US as a whole. We're currently witnessing that tension between Trump (and his supporters) and the existing US democratic institutions. Certain institutions appear to be breaking, others are holding, and most are under significant strain. But compare that to China where Xi runs a cult of personality, shoots any messengers who bring him bad news, and nobody makes decisions themselves at any level without explicit direction from Xi. The US isn't at that point yet. It's *slowly* and *incrementally* moving in that direction. The way to fight it isn't to use emotions and shouting. Nobody listens to that, and everyone tunes out. The way to do it is to 1) acknowledge the people who voted for Trump for practical everyday reasons, and acknowledge their problems, 2) stop being so ideologically captured by academic ideas that the vast majority of people think is weird or doesn't apply to them (mostly identity politics) and then 3) put together a platform that sells a vision of hope for the future instead of the current vision of the end of the world that the left is so intent on selling. Their vision gets lots of clicks, but it doesn't get votes from the mainstream.

There are people and organizations out there that will gladly buy a laptop that can only run signed apps downloaded from the app store with an administrator account. Schools will love this. So will people who have to buy a computer for their grandparents.

In ten years only rich people will be able to afford a new refrigerator that doesn’t have a screen and require a persistent internet connection to operate. You’re going to see ads where a woman in a BMW pulls into her garage, walks into a modernist kitchen, and uses her bare arm, decorated with a Vacheron Constantin watch, to open a screenless refrigerator.

I'm not American, and I'm aware of many of the authoritarian leanings of the current US administration. We're currently living through a test of democratic institutions across the west. Those institutions are holding to various degrees, but barely. But to compare western democracies to Chinese autocracy as if they're equivalent is bonkers. You have to recognize it's a matter of degree.

From the government and military's point of view, this is exactly the reason they want a flourishing free market economy, so that there's lots of infrastructure to call on when they need it. The demand for ships was real, and the market adapted and supplied them. When the demand went away, the market adapted and turned to building other things.

That take is just so far from reality it's bonkers. People with high credit scores tend to a) not take on as much debt, and b) get significantly better interest rates when they do. The last time we switched mortgage providers, our mortgage broker said our credit scores were probably the highest he'd seen in over a decade of doing this, and he went back to the lender and negotiated an extra half percent lower interest rate than what they offered, which was already below prime. Credit score is a measure of risk, that's all. If you're high risk of default, they charge a premium. People with high credit scores tend to borrow money for things that improve their financial situation in the long run: student loans, mortgages, and a car loan for a modest car to get them to work. Maybe a loan to start a low risk business, like an electrician. People with low credit scores borrow money to buy smartphones, TVs, decked out pickup trucks, and even doordash orders. i.e. stuff that has no payback.

It's only this outdated industrial revolution notion that we need to do everything at the same time every day that leads to ridiculous solutions like changing the clocks. Just have different hours for activities at different times of the year. That's all you're doing anyway with shifting the clocks. School doesn't have to start at the same time every day throughout the year.

As an engineer who spends most of my time designing systems that involve both automation and humans working in tandem, you're absolutely right. Any design constraint like, "the operators will just have to do this when such-and-such happens" are doomed to fail if you really need them to do it every time. A good design takes incentives into account. A human will do something if they get something for it. You can't rely on a person to push a button when a bin is full, but you can if they need to push that button to get a label to put on the bin so they can send it down the conveyor. Likewise, it's a good idea to put the "bad part" reject bin at least 3 steps away from where they stand, so they get annoyed if the machine is making bad parts, and that'll get them to call maintenance to fix it. If it's too convenient they'll happily make bad parts all day. Society has the same problem: even though most people want to be good, there are enough people who will just throw trash out their window or dump toxic waste in the river, or just refuse to work and demand a handout, that you need to build a system with incentives and deterrents that reward the people who are contributing, and catch/punish the people who are abusing the commons. While capitalism does a good job of the first, regulations are needed for the second. That's why communism doesn't work. It achieves the second but doesn't achieve the first.

Chinese people aren't stupid. But whenever you try to run your country from a top-down authoritarian style, and especially a one-man show, then you can never be as efficient as the free market. Over in the west we do interfere in the market in order to protect a national security interest or to punish a country that isn't playing by the rules-based world order, but the level of market interference in China is at least an order of magnitude more. They have solar farms built in places with nowhere near enough local industry to use it, and no grid capacity to get it to a market that needs it. Private industry doesn't build stuff like that without some guarantees that they can sell the product. But if you give them government incentives, they're happy to build it and let it sit idle. When my boss was in China visiting a tool & die place, the government literally dropped off half a dozen brand new milling machines for them to use at no charge. That's wild. If you're just trying to grow to catch up, this stuff works, but once you reach market saturation you can't tolerate inefficiencies like that anymore. You need the market to do its thing and find the optimum allocation of resources to meet market demand.

Standard time is based on the sun being overhead at noon (or close to it, depending on where you are in the time zone). It's symmetric. There's about as much light before noon as after noon. Nobody says we all have to get up at the same time every day. We increasingly work remotely and have to meet with people around the world. We can figure it out. We've created these stupid anomalies where a user says "show me the events from midnight to 2 am local time" and once a year there's an extra hour of events sprinkled in. Or an extra hour of production on that day, if you work in a factory that runs 24 hours. It's absolutely bonkers.

Watson.

As a Canadian, I absolutely hate DST. Keep it on standard time. If you want your workers to get up an hour earlier in the summer, change the hours you're officially open! That's all you're really doing anyway.

They basically walked away unharmed when they shoved Teams down everybody's throat. It was ruled anti-competitive, but they received no penalty because they promised to "restore fair competition".

Now they are going to do the same with their spicy auto-complete.

I'm willing to suffer through the transition, but so help me God, if they come out with a USB-D port right after we finish transitioning to USB-C, then that's it! I'm never doing this again!

No, because experience isn't a protected category. Age is, but only in certain cases mostly dealing with existing employees. Youth isn't protected at all:

https://www.eeoc.gov/age-discr...

"The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) forbids age discrimination against people who are age 40 or older. It does not protect workers under the age of 40, although some states have laws that protect younger workers from age discrimination. It is not illegal for an employer or other covered entity to favor an older worker over a younger one, even if both workers are age 40 or older."