Same here. I'm not sure what the "not translated into English until 2005" in TFA is meant to mean; sure, maybe that specific book wasn't translated until that date, but much of Europe watched the Polish fuzzy-felt TV adaption in 1978 or 1985.
Yep! I’m digitally literate but can’t do anything more advanced than “hello world”. Never had the time or really interest in learning programming.
In the last year I’ve built scripts and even full fledged apps with GUIs to solve a number of problems and automate a bunch of routine tasks at work and in my hobbies. It feels like I woke up with a superpower.
And I’ve learned a ton too, about how the plumbing works, but I still can’t write code on my own. That makes me useful but dependent on the AI.
Which are, of course, also difficult to retrofit with a lot of new wiring. Old plaster lath is something of an issue too but not nearly as much and is easier to retrofit--or just replace.
Does it really require that much R&D? Slap one of the excellent AMD mobile processors with built-in GPU in there, standard cooling (they don't use much more power than they did 5 years ago. They surely have the blueprints for the last XPS machines), and a bigger NVME. It's all more or less commodity hardware in a name-your-preference shell.
It’s easy until you can’t really fine tune the software because you use windows and it’ll eat the battery alive for reasons you can’t control as a manufacturer (but customers will still think it’s your fault)
OEMs have been doing basically this for years with their phones for decades at this point, pushing customized builds of Android with every phone they make, this has been successful to close the gap Apple created when they released the iPhone.
I guess a hurdle smartphones didn't have as they were breaking into a new market is compatibility; outside of the tech world, virtually all of corporate and personal environment is dependent on Windows and Windows-only software. Steam has shown it can work with SteamOS and Proton, making gaming on Linux a reality for a wide audience. What's missing is a major OEM to build a high-spec laptop with a custom Linux build to optimize performance and battery life, with a decent Windows compatibility layer and that would provide software companies an incentive to sell native Linux versions and support. Is Samsung really going to keep their laptop line depend on Windows, and leave it on the side-line as they will never be able to really optimize battery life and performance and compare to the MacBooks?
sure, you'll have some unhappy customers but that's not new. They used to sell just fine. I wonder if it's the neverending hunger for bigger margins that's really doing them in. It's not enough to make SOME profits when you need to show shareholders you're making MORE profits.
Not “purely” as a byproduct. They are complementary industries. Without the leather trade, meat producers would have to pay to properly dispose of that byproduct.
I agree that would be wasteful, and I love quality leather products myself. But I recognize that the leather, meat and dairy lobbies all work towards the same goal of ever expanding the industry.
So I am always on the lookout for great vegan leather. If the demand market dries up, this will raise the cost of meat and dairy, which will give alternatives to those a better chance to thrive.
If meat industry disappeared, I don't believe the leather industry would exist on any sort of comparable scale. People would not be raising cows and devoting fields to feed and the whole chain of events that goes into slaughting and animal for it's skin. Leather would be profoundly expensive.
The meat industry on the other hand would be largely unaffected if the leather industry disappeared. They just need to find something else to do with the skin, and they would over night.
To say they're complementary doesn't mean that they depend on each other to an equal degree.
I don't believe it would be easy to find a use for all that cow skin. Think of the enormous amounts. But even if they did find a use for it that doesn't cost them, it's not likely to be nearly as profitable as selling it as an input to the leather industry. (If there was a more profitable way to use cow skin we'd probably be doing that by now)
> They just need to find something else to do with the skin, and they would over night.
Not even. The skin would go into the same grinders as all of the "useless" parts of the animal and become whatever downstream products it becomes (dog food, protein additives for animal feed, etc)
It befuddles me too. My understanding is that government spending is approved by congress and that all organizations except the Pentagon have passed their audits. This is not to say that there isn't _some_ waste, fraud and abuse in between the cracks, but any large expense is approved by Congress and the executive can't unilaterally override those spending choices.
There's a reason the federal budget is several inches of very thin paper. The budget spells out how much money gets spent for various purposes, programs, projects, etc. Of course they don't specify the kind of paperclips the FAA buys. But they will approve or modify the FAA's budget plan which includes $X for office supplies, $Y for an upgrade to the FAA's network equipment in a branch office, $Z for upgrading some nav beacons, and so on.
The executive branch can't defund or "stop spending money on" anything. Nixon decided he just wouldn't spend money on programs he didn't like, and congress very rapidly passed a law that said that the president couldn't do it, because the "power of the purse" rests solely with congress.
It certainly can't stop issuing payments for existing obligations, and it especially can't take money back, which M did a day or two ago to NYC because he read a tweet that said NYC was spending money housing migrants in "luxury hotels", which shockingly turned out to be nonsense...
That's why all of this DOGE crap is such theatrical nonsense. Congress, representing their state's interests and the interests of those who live in their district, via two separate branches, approves all the budgets.
No matter what T and M say, no federal agency can just willy-nilly decide to spend money it's allocated by congress on other stuff.
> The executive branch can't defund or "stop spending money on" anything. Nixon decided he just wouldn't spend money on programs he didn't like, and congress very rapidly passed a law that said that the president couldn't do it, because the "power of the purse" rests solely with congress.
That's all great in theory: in actual reality those laws are just words on paper, Congress has no interest in asserting its authority, and enforcement rests with the executive.
Sure. But then the continuous narrative must be that Trump is violating the law. Every single person who supports Trump should have to confront the fact that Trump is doing this in a way that declares the end of our constitutional order and his position as an autocrat.
I don't think they see a problem with this. My grandfather used to say we needed to get a couple leaders from GE or whatever company was huge and successful then, and let them have free reign for a year.
You end up driving up the share price in the short term and destroying the company in the long term but by then you’re gone as CEO with your golden parachute. Not unlike presidents who will be gone in 4 years time (if second term) and let someone else deal with the consequences of their actions.
There are definitely people who think that a president who just violates the law in order to achieve these outcomes is a fine thing. Those people are lost. Nothing I can say to those people will stop them from eventually putting a bullet in my brain.
The goal should be messaging to everybody else. Especially those who might like the outcomes of Trump's crimes but would prefer not to have a president that just smashes through the law to get there. A way to help achieve this is to repeat, over and over and over, that Trump's actions are violating shitloads of laws.
Trump is breaking the law, but Congress has no interest in holding him accountable - and they're the only institution Congress specifies for having the authority to hold the president accountable.
So...Trump is breaking the law and getting away with it. What else is new?
This is different from immunity. What’s supposed to happen is the action is stopped, as though the EOs never happened. It’s not illegal to issue illegal EOs, they just can’t be followed. The only real point sanctions come is when a judge says “stop” and the people involved don’t. This is violating a court order, which is contempt of court. But Trump wouldn’t be violating it, Musk would.
Yeah, but contempt of court still is enforced by the executive (the court can order enforcement, but it’s the DOJ [US Marshal’s Service] that does arrests and the DOJ [Bureau of Prisons] that holds those arrested.)
BUT... even if the executive is under legal theory constitutionally unitary, it isn’t actually unitary, it consists of individual people who act based on their own perception of legitimacy, and when the President abandons the principle of government of law and not arbitrary individual will in dealing with the courts, well, that also threatens the theoretical infrastructure that binds the people carrying guns in various executive departments to his authority, and we can very quickly end up in one of those highly unpredictable periods of history that produces lots of really neat stories to read about afterwards but is somewhat less pleasant to live through.
Absolutely, I didn’t want to give the impression any of this is good. I just wanted to correct the common misconception that issuing invalid EOs is, itself, a crime.
This is a good example of what I mean. There is no evidence that DOGE is acting on actual fraud and abuse, that is immediately obvious if you consider how broad most of their actions are. And unless you think that the federal government should essentially not exist at all I don't think you can declare all this just "waste".
DOGE should be able to make those arguments themselves. They're also not particularly transparent, so we have to assemble information from various sources.
They're right now firing all probationary employees at multiple agencies. That is entirely indiscriminate, and almost certainly disruptive to the mission of those agencies.
The actions at NIH and NSF will likely kill a large portion of the scientific research they used to fund. So unless you consider science in general be a waste I think these broad cuts clearly don't target actual waste and abuse.
The Twitter DOGE account posted a screenshot of where a 'Gender Identity Section' had been removed from a website.
Where is the efficiency saving and where was the waste?
This is really what has been on my mind. Simone tagged Elon showing him a screenshot of some veteran website allowing you to select more than two genders. Elon replies with a “On it. @DOGE”
I thought doge was about efficiency, why is he spending resources on the culture war?
USAID, CFPB, 18F (free tax filing), DOJ (lawyers who worked on Trump cases), EPA (halting alternative energy projects), NSF/NIH (funding by keyword search of anything remotely DEI related) etc
There aren’t any examples so far of stuff that is clearly waste and abuse.
If you don't think foreign aid is important for the continued safety of the US then you don't understand soft power and have no business in modern politics.
Sadly the people in charge fit into this category, except for the ones like Marco Rubio who actually do understand this but have no spine and are willing to overlook this stupidity for a seat at the table.
You have a child like nativity if you think foreign aid doesn’t come with strings attached.
You do know the polio vaccine program in Pakistan where DNA analysis to find Bin Laden was done through USAID? The one that set vaccination back decades?
I looked at the screenshot they posted about the 2.23M, which is all they posted. So we know, if I’m correct, absolutely and precisely nothing about this payment? Who was doing the equity assessment, how many people over what time period? What are the details of this, what was the purpose? I went digging briefly and found nothing. Why would I assume this is waste without any clue what it is?
The question is - are they fundamentally altering the function of government agencies.
I think you can get the answer from what they post. Cutting $400M in external contracts for a $10B agencies isn’t cutting major functions of the agency.
To be fair, the guy I was responding to got flagged so you probably can’t see it.
This wasn’t really our argument, and would look more like moving the goalposts.
To have the argument anyways, I looked back through their posts back to jan 20, and there’s really no information about most of the cuts. I presume that the few things they highlight, eg equity programs or whatever, are the worse of the worst that they could find, cause isn’t that what they’d show us? They could be cutting basically anything behind the scenes, and they themselves may not have a good idea what they’re cutting. As of jan 31st, they claimed to have cut 1-1.2 billion dollars overall. I assume that number is much higher now. Why would I trust that, while fumbling around looking at payment descriptions, one of Musk’s techbro zoomers didn’t hamper or cripple an important function of one of these departments? Where can I find the in-depth information on every cut?
Because the tech bros said it. Because that's how all tech bro gimmicks over the years went, be it crypto or investments or you name it - they claimed to "disrupt", "improve" and "revolutionize", and your guess how much of that actually happened.
Even if we decided that all of these were waste, that's still not even the bulk of their cuts. "Hey we got rid of some wasteful stuff because we closed 95% of the organization and some portion of that stuff was waste" is not sufficient.
the problem is labeling anything ideological as “waste”; one can get rid of anything under that cover, quite convenient.
You don’t need to write “the agency will no longer do X” you just need to fire the people doing X. Case in point the EPA and CFPB (which catch fraud among companies but were not worried about that anymore are we)
No – but why would you trust their Twitter feed and their Twitter feed only? Elon Musk himself has talked openly about dismantling the CFPB and USAID on his private account; in that case, it's a matter of "agency will no longer do anything".
Oh, they are posting a lot of cancellations, they rarely, if ever show what payments are for, exactly, and whether they are actual waste, or that it doesn't "neatly fits into the function the government agency is supposed to fill".
> but you see a few building leases sprinkled it.
You think agencies cannot lease buildings? And that it's a waste and fraud?
> I haven’t seen anything so far that says “Agency will no longer do X”, but happy to be be corrected.
They have literally unilaterally shut down several government agencies with bogus claims.
It's a damn shame the IRS funding is getting gutted and those billionaire 1% will be getting cuts anyways. Hard to go after those not paying when Daddy Trump and Daddy Musk cut the legs out from under the enforcement and audit folks.
Everything they’ve been cutting so far has been ideological (DEI USAID and other agencies that are“run by Marxists”) or retribution (DOJ lawyers getting sacked) or self-serving (EPA CFPB).
The only example of waste are the 150 yr old SA recipients. Sure that happens (we’ve been hearing about “welfare queens” for decades) but certainly not something new the DOGE “uncovered “.
And why are we entrusting a bunch of young engineers to identify fraud? They might be qualified to refactor and streamline computer systems but are certainly not qualified to determine what is “legitimate “ spending and what is not.
