No... It was purchased.

This is true, but again, this shouldn't be a competition. They're both dangerous environments.

Especially now, since the Secretary of HHS wants to let bird flu run rampant to encourage chicken immunity... i.e. rapid mutation among the birds, but completely discounting rampant mutation among the virus. And ESPECIALLY since there are already bird to human transmission cases confirmed and scientist are worried that it's only a matter of time for human to human transmission will occur: https://hms.harvard.edu/news/are-we-cusp-major-bird-flu-outbreak

Arguably, US factory farms are just as bad if not worse. But this isn't a contest, we should be trying to reduce ALL methods that can lead to these sorts of pandemics/diseases/variants.

The problem with promoting things like Chinese origins, it that is serves the political theatre of blame flinging rather than the real issue of how do we prevent, prepare for, solve, etc the next pandemic?

For instance, I don't think shutting down the pandemic early warning department was a good idea (https://www.reuters.com/article/world/partly-false-claim-trump-fired-entire-pandemic-response-team-in-2018-idUSKBN21C32C/) and IMO led to us being caught with our pants down for COVID.

I was thinking that it was on purpose, but based on the numbers, it looks like Trump doesn't know the difference between a tariff and a trade deficit. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c93gq72n7y1o

It looks like this is an example of "don't attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence,"

It doesn't make anything better... if anything, it makes it way way worse.

I think the purpose is to avoid legal responsibility for a rug pull or other such crime that would accompany a "normal" security.

I feel like this is the whole "no tax on tips" thing. I don't think that Trump really wanted to alleviate tax burdens on restaurant servers, but to make it so that gratuities paid to Supreme Court justices can't be taxed: https://www.bakerlaw.com/insights/bribe-vs-tip-the-implications-of-snyder-v-united-states-for-companies/

Anyone who has been scuba diving for a long time knows from personal experience that coral reefs have pretty much all gone brown all over the world.
Look up any pictures of reefs from ten years ago to today. It's reefs everywhere. I used to dive regularly all over the place. They've all been devastated.

I like to call it "pulling a Boeing"

The door blowout thing is a massive QA issue, but it is a QA issue. It was overlooked and they definitely have a very crappy QA pipeline but these lapses happen. Especially when management is cutting corners. Please note that I'm not defending Boeing about this, I'm just saying that it doesn't seem "malicious", just incompetent. This kind of thing happens any many companies (this is pretty standard now that the world value MBAs over engineers, scientists, labor, etc).

But what's surprising to me that this kind of thing didn't happen with the MCAS fiasco. THAT was malicious negligence. They designed (poorly) a flawed system with way too much automated control to overcome having to actually have to do real engineering work on a new plane. They assumed that is worked fine with likely the same or worse QA pipeline that missed the door plug issue. But the WORST part is that they intentionally hid it from pilots, FAA, etc (it wasn't even in the manual). It caused hundreds of deaths. They at first tried to blame it on "pilot error." Which worked well for them since... to be blunt... the color of their skin and an American bias that the darker your skin is, the more incompetent you are.
Turns out that, no.... Boeing cut every cornet they possible could in pursuit of profits and tried to patch it in software resulting in the deaths of 346 people. And yet, somehow they walked away basically scot-free. The entire strategy behind MCAS was criminally negligent manslaughter at best. At worst, I dunno second degree mass murder?

And before the door plug event, Beoing was very close to being granted safety excemptions for the MAX 7 and MAX 10. Are you fucking kidding me?

On a personal note, I find this interesting for a number of reasons. The first is that I see this kind of thing happening at so many companies (and destroying whatever reputation they may have had - I call it the "Curse of the MBA") And secondly, I was supposed to be on a MAX 8 on the thursday, but they grounded all of them the tuesday I before I was supposed to fly.

Even the "architect" of his removal signed the letter.

https://www.businessinsider.com/openai-cofounder-ilya-sutskever-deeply-regrets-participating-ousting-sam-altman-2023-11

I also like "Limit Liability Monopoly" ;)

One thing he doesn't address but I think is a huge paradigm shift, is how we're moving to an economy where nobody owns anything. BMW was recently trying to charge subscription for heated seats (I don't think that went over well). But it's the natural extension of things like Adobe (you can't own Photoshop anymore, it's all subscription).

I hear what you're saying. But having used it, I'm saying that Eye Tracking is not just a feature, it's revolutionary. It's not a matter of price. It's like buying a car and saying that "people don't want to pay more for wheels." It will be the thing that makes AR/VR useful/attractive. In fact, I hope that it decouples from AR/VR and replaces the mouse (at least on portable devices like laptops).

I don't know why people don't talk more about eye tracking. Having used it on the PSVR2, I have to say that it's a game changer. It's almost like it's reading your mind.

The fact that the Quest 3 doesn't have it is going to be a major oversight.

A Unity rep consulted one of their lawyer about a response to question:

"Consent is not required for additional fees to take effect, and the only version of our terms is the most current version; you simply cannot choose to comply with a prior version."

https://forum.unity.com/threads/unity-plan-pricing-and-packaging-updates.1482750/page-45#post-9297488

Seems to indicate how they feel about "changing the terms" in the future.

We are listening, talking to our team members, community, customers, and partners..."

Maybe if they had done this before making the announcement in the first place, they wouldn't be in this situation. There's so much of this going on... MBAs assume they know better than the people actually doing the work, they refuse to believe they might have some valid and applicable knowledge.