Musk and Ramaswamy also suggest that Trump could impose rules like requiring federal employees to return to the office five days per week, which they say could bring “voluntary terminations” they would welcome. “If federal employees don’t want to show up, American taxpayers shouldn’t pay them for the Covid-era privilege of staying home.”

This is probably the least destructive proposal, but it highlights the mentality of a typical narcissist CEO.

It’s all relative, but they are shit out of luck with viewership compared to the spending.

But after five years on the market and a reported $20 billion in spending, Apple can’t be happy with 0.3 percent of available streaming viewership.

Apple is notorious in keeping 1st party content exclusive, so it has to be an insane money sink if they are breaking that rule and now will start licensing their content to 3rd parties.

On Section 230 Supreme Court ruled twice that FCC does have authority.

And even though the same Supreme Court just limited their authority with overturning of Chevron deference doctrine, they are guaranteed to make an exception in this case for their supreme leader. Prepare for dark days.

Chrome is worth around $20 billion, so no matter who gets it, it will be run identically.

Added NSFW flag.

Tax only applies to farms worth more than £1 million, so “lower and low middle class” are exempt.

While Ernst urges proper vetting, CNN reported last week that Trump’s transition team isn’t using the FBI to do background checks on the appointees, saying they believe that would take too long. Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) called Hegseth a “good guy,” noting, “I know him well.”

“Did you ever know about the past sexual assault accusation?” Raw Story asked.

“Come on now,” Tuberville complained. “Come on now.”

Perfect summary of the vetting process.

Interesting experiment with UFC clip. Content ID systems are pretty powerful these days. It only took 9 minutes to flag it.

But that’s the point. Flagging content from corporations is more profitable in the long run even if you lose some traffic because of content removal. But removing spam that generates a lot of traffic would be net a loss, so for-profit companies are incentivized not only to keep it, but promote it.

It gives me the similar vibe of Netflix animation series Fast & Furious: Spy Racers just instead of being US focused its Japan focused.

Extracted trailer from Netflix: https://gofile.io/d/Tg6RTv (can watch directly).

Also, they give 13+ age rating here.

Cover up is always how they get you.

Enhanced protection status gives heritage sites “high-level immunity from military attacks”, according to UNESCO. “Criminal prosecutions and sanctions, conducted by the competent authorities, may apply in cases where individuals do not respect the enhanced protection granted to a cultural property,” it said.

Any measure will just get vetoed by the US, the most “competent authority” when it comes to being Israel’s bitch.

The only way to stop destruction of heritage sites is to stop the genocide and war crimes. Because as long as they are unpunished for crimes against humanity, preservation of culture is a mere after fought.

Why would one have to connect to other Apple service to back up the data to another provider? Sounds like intentional anticompetitive friction.

Case in point why there is no such thing as “safe backdoors”.

Issue is that 3rd party apps doesn’t have the same system access as iCloud. So you can’t use any other cloud the same way you can iCloud. So by definition that’s anticompetitive, since you have no options.

Isn’t Finder a macOS app? Lawsuit is only about iOS.

That is only true if other apps have the same operating system access as iCloud. If others apps can’t perform the same actions because of vendor lock in, that’s anticompetitive monopolistic behavior. Apple already failed to dismiss identical lawsuit in US, so the lawsuit is at least valid on its face.

If that’s your takeaway from the comment, anything further would be pointless.

I thought it was rhetorical question, so I just added context, since the answer was obvious, but if you need it explained here you go.

Action itself is not different. Scale, logistics, and consequences are though.

1. Trump doesn’t have unilateral control of National Gourd. It would require consent of state governors to enact.
2. National Guard was only there to maintain peace. They weren’t ordered to break up a protest. But it went to shit and he took all of that on himself, learned from it and went to do good (I would love to see Trump admit he did something wrong at least once).
3. He then banned chokeholds and other restraint methods.
4. And he moved the case of Floyd’s murder to state attorney general, so that he and other murders could be prosecuted instead of it being covered up.

If you don’t see how someone learning from a mistake and moving to do better in the future is exactly something we should strive for, you are a lost cause. Because there is no perfect human being let alone perfect politician.

Tim Walz apologized and said it was a mistake. He learned the lesson.