HardlyCurious

Seems really strange to me to reject the notion of 'reading between the lines' when we know the motives of the company's leadership. We know they work with Google, we know they are interested in driving views and profits. Any interpretation that is consistent with their known motivations is worth considering.

Some things just aren't feasible to collect evidence for. You would need access to their private communications to find evidence. So your basically giving a pass to any maleficence done in the dark.

I must be lucky. I'm still rocking a pixel 3. It's got multiple breaks in the screen, the back of the phone is pretty cracked, the camera cover is completed smashed out. Hey somehow this thing still works and takes ok pictures.

Maybe I'm an idiot, but I think the expanded AI capabilities are the biggest step forward for phones in like 5+ years or more.

But I'm someone who is still using a pixel 3, so maybe I'm just trying to make myself feel better about purchase I need to make because my phone's battery is pretty close to useless.

True of the US yes. Equally? I probably wouldn't say that. The US govt doesn't have the same control over media the the Chinese govt has. So they have to work harder to keep things out of public view. The US also has to massage the way they work to be somewhat within the bounds of the constitution.

There is ample evidence of China's intentions and capability to install backdoors. Everything made in China or a heavily influenced Chinese country should be assumed to be compromised, even if 'proven' otherwise. Chances are we just haven't found the backdoor yet.

Requirements are hard, but ... you don't need bug reports to implement bug free requirements. So the only value the bugs would have is if they are for behaviors that should be documented as requirements.

Energy cost has long been viewed as a means to constrain consumption. This new approach seems to undermine that approach given the reduced cost per volume.

If I'm paying entirely based on volume, then making my home twice as efficient makes my bill half as much. But under this new system, I wouldn't realize the same savings.

Seems like a policy set with priorities other then environmental protections.

Why do you think an electric heat pump will increase comfort over oil heating? It's not that I think heat pumps are bad, I just didn't know there was a claim of any improvements beyond efficiency / environmental benefits.

Socialism, despite what republicans want you think isn't any govt service. If that is true then the only socialism free model would be anarchy.

That last bit about the media is both true and perhaps uncomfortable for Democrats today whose political will aligns with the media narratives.

Yeah, that office manager probably knew who would be getting the tickets in advance.

Well, I can't think of any media articles talking about, specifically state level, censorship efforts from the left. But the Whitehouse was recently told by courts it couldn't communicate with social media companies about content moderation. Trying to claim that isn't censorship will require some mental gymnastics.

But let's not forget the censorship around the hunter Biden laptop story and the censorship of lab leak theories for covid. Both completely legitimate topics, both completely blocked out during an election year. The right wasn't calling for or defending those actions, the left was.

You didn't play monopoly much growing I guess. Winning in capitalism is all about securing position. From there, leveraging profits isnt hard.

It's all just a coincidence that this investigator tried to investigate Burisma for corruption, and Burisma attempted to buy access to Joe Biden through Hunter Biden, who was only selling the 'appearance' of access. Which means Burisma was obviously corrupt for attempting to buy said access even if it was in fact an illusion and they were being conned.

And it's just a coincidence that Biden claimed he didn't know his son was on the board of Burisma when it was later proved he did know that. He just, forgot, I guess.

The corruption is just as obvious as the denials.

He bragged about leveraging foreign aid to get the lead investigator fired as part of an effort to fight corruption in the Ukraine. Think about. If your trying to fight corruption, and you have evidence this lead investigator is corrupt, couldn't you just present that evidence to get them fired? Unless of course the corruption goes higher. In which case, the futility of the action is obvious.

The defense doesn't make sense on the merits. The investigator who got fired claims it was because of who he was going after. I don't know if he is honest or corrupt, but I do know that Ukraine claims he wasn't fired or pressured to resign but rather resigned on his own. So someone can't get their story straight.

Media outlets who went out of their way to say there was nothing wrong here all pretty much acknowledged that it at least 'looks bad'