So a perfectly good plane that someone could enjoy and fly sits languishing at an airport because the owner, who now can't fly or doesn't want to, won't sell it? I get the attachment and all. However, if you know there's a finite number of these things then please sell it to someone who would use it.
That's a golden age plane and it should be flown. Too bad many people would rather let something rot.
> because the owner, who now can't fly or doesn't want to, won't sell it
It’s an airworthy 1958 Cessna for a reason. Planes like these don’t depreciate like cars, by time, but like engines: flight time is the principal determiner of deterioration. (For pressurised planes its pressure cycles.) The only thing being “wasted” here might be hangar space.
To detain political opponents without cause or proof. To do the same to critics, comics, anyone that has ever posted/said anything negative about the admin, and on and on.
Removal of Habeus Corpus means you can be detained without cause, and you do not get a chance to defend yourself.
There's probably a few guys at in a shipyard who checked twitter during lunch and are cracking jokes about spending the afternoon fishing or whatever while putting on a bunch of hot PPE right about now.
The line between what AI can write and what it can't is moving and it is moving quickly. My bet with this is that we will want tools built for the new reality rather than repurposing our older tools, even though they won't completely go away.
You just defined the role of COO at most companies. CEO has always been about sales, brand, vision, (capital raises,) etc. It's the COO who keeps the company moving.
In sense investing is gambling. But at least you can make informed decision on what you think go up or down in value based on real world. Where as crypto is purely speculative with no actual tie to economy or anything.
Bitcoin has a really good and nice use case, you can move millions of dollars between countries with words in your head. No customs will ever find out.
Can Gold, diamonds or even paper dollars do that?
You can hit met with the ethics subject but another matter.
Meta's Reels is much less engaging than TikTok (as measured by user numbers and anecdotal user experience), and if competition from TikTok is removed they'll have even less reason to improve it.
Yeah I've noticed that and have always been so surprised by it. Given Meta's resources and AI strength, I would have thought they would have made their Reels so much better but TikTok, who has FAR FAR less data on me (I beta tested Facebook that's how old my account is), can show me much more engaging content within about 15 to 30 minutes of me signing up and using it.
Maybe ByteDance has expertise on a wholly different sort of AIs that Meta isn't great at? I've always been very perplexed by this.
>National security has always beaten First Amendment (and many other rights.)
This is absolutely not the case, as evidenced by the fact we all have access to encryption, which the security establishment tried to ban in the '90s. The First Amendment is the reason why secure encryption isn't restricted to government and military usage only.
It was export restricted for ages. If you were an American company as late as the late 2000's (at least) you had to get permission to export strong encryption.
The right to communicate math ended at the US border. It's entirely feasible given the laws for that kind of walling off of content to be legal.
There's also the chilling effect of the government doing it anyways, even if they will eventually lose that legal battle in court.
I would dare to say that National Security should beat the First Amendment.
But the argument that TikTok bears any relationship to "national security" is ludicrous on the face of it. They're not posting nuclear secrets, they're posting short videos.
National Security Through Obscurity?
When has the freedom of religion, speech, press, or assembly ever been bad for the United States?
The government can make agreements with its agents to limit those, and can control its own information, but not other peoples'.
Not only that, but the US subsidiary (TikTok, Inc) also has a 1A right to receive the feeds that power the app and relay them out to the rest of the country. The algorithmic choices of what content to show, to who, and when, are by themselves speech.
Because the government cannot ban the "receiving" part, it obviously also cannot ban the "relaying".
I don't know how the Court will rule, but if TikTok is poised to lose I'm very curious about how the Justices will deal with the conundrum I explained above.
I've been told there are two places which value experience:
1. A large organization where they have enough people with decades of knowledge to recognize what that is worth.
2. A small startup as head or lead on some domain where they need your knowledge to build their products.
It used to be that you could consult but I can tell you from direct experience with this market that it has been flooded with folks who've never consulted but neednwork, e.g. they are charging way too little. The flip side, it's a great time to hire "cheap" contract talent.
I remember sitting down with a Google engineer who told us that even though our ad code looked suspiciously like we had copied it from Google itself (we had) that one part of it would only work for Google on Google. That is, the wall between their sell side and buy side had special things no one else could use. This was ~10 years ago and it left us with such a sour taste.
Nothing like market dominance in an "open" market.
I feel this. I got the "you look older than your profile pic" comment during an interview last year. That one was fun. Dude wanted to know if I could even code anymore.
Sheesh - what a lame statement. All the juniors I've worked with are very keen to learn from us old timers, and likewise their enthusiasm and energy rubs off on us. It's a win-win as far as I'm concerned.
Indeed, we can intensify or we can reduce fault lines. Labeling old or young folks with worst stereotypes will not solve problems apart from giving jollies to some on social media.
So far for me working with young people has been lot of fun and learning on both sides.
I think some organizations, groups or individuals are more about having all the right traits and buzzword experience on the CV and are more afraid of being disillusioned about anything that is part of that kind of goal than interested in really solving problems or learning skills to actually do so.
I would imagine it's extremely hard to prove though. The prospective employer could just maintain that the applicant "wouldn't be a good culture fit" or similar.
Literally all companies in my industry have an application track just "for graduates". They just want young kids, I never understood how this is legal. What am I missing?
This is a regulatory issue. There are far better lighting used in EU and from the same auto manufacturers. They have pushed for these in the US but the regulations are slow.
That's a golden age plane and it should be flown. Too bad many people would rather let something rot.
Also, I don't support stealing a plane.