There were never morals and ethics in company policies. Ever. The only time something that seems moral and ethical happens in corporate policies is either through happenstance or a law forces them to be that way.
WHYAREWEALLCAPS
I had weird stuff like that start to happen with my BL Touch. Turns out the bracket I'd printed had started to crack in a hard to see spot, so every bed mesh I took was a little different. Am ordering a metal bracket to replace it.
The problem with section 3 is that it says nothing of running for a position, just that someone who has engaged in insurrection or rebellion may not hold an office, elected or appointed. If we go with the strictest interpretation, Trump absolutely can run for president. He can even win. However, can he hold the office? That's another question. It could be sidestepped if the Republicans gain 2/3rds majority in both Houses of Congress as they can "remove such disability." If they don't, it will go to the Supreme Court most likely. And, well, barring several of them dropping dead or retiring, we all know how that is gonna play out(2000 all over again, basically).
What we really need to see in 2024 are states amending their constitutions to bar those who engage in insurrection and rebellion from being on the ballot or, better yet, from being certified or whatever it is in each state when deciding electors for the electorate college vote. This is something that should have happened after Jan 6th, but, well, here we are.
Regardless of what happens, any outcome other then Trump being made sitting president again is going to harm the Republicans going forward as it will further alienate Republican voters from the voting process. The likely violent backlash from a Trump loss will also likely alienate more levelheaded independents from voting for Republicans, as well. If he is refused to be seated, shit is going to be insane. This election is a hail Mary for the Republicans - if it goes any other way than in their favor they have likely hamstrung themselves for the foreseeable future. It could even blow up in their faces if it goes to them if Trump actually goes through with trying to make his senile self a dictator.
To be fair, to an OF model it is. To any creator their content is because that's how they make a living. While getting people back to the moon is great and all, making enough to eat for the next month will always take precedence to people. I mean, if it came to whether I would be able to eat or people walked on the moon again, well, fuck those astronauts, my belly is going to be full.
This has two effects. First, it is supposed to entice with a "cheap" option. Second, it normalizes ads being part of the experience.
A lot of search results still take me to Reddit. It is still a source of knowledge.
So typical rich tech bro.
Conservative ideology is based on bigotry. Always has been. The fact the Republican party has so easily and wholeheartedly embraced white supremacists, misogynists, rapists, etc, proves the point. Indeed, the de facto leader of conservatism in the United States proudly embodies all those things and more. All the while he is the clear leader in their presidential candidate race without even having to participate in the process. It is impossible to extricate conservatism from bigotry - if you're a conservative in the US you are a bigot either directly or through association. You know, the ol' ten people and a Nazi having dinner is 11 Nazis having dinner.
Yep. Other than thrill seekers, the only reason any business does something is for the money. If you can go, "Hey, you don't need to spend $12k on a new battery pack! Bring it down to Bubba's Batteries Bazaar and we can fix it for less!", you will get business.
I'd be willing to bet it has less to do with the article not being available in India and that it is available at all. Let's be honest, geoblocking is a joke, especially for a news outlet. Therefore, if Reuters wants to do business in India, one of the world's largest markets, they have to take it down everywhere. Now, if I ran a news service that wrote an article they didn't like and since I'm not doing business in India, I would have the power to tell them to go pound sand. Assuming they didn't decide to go the route of burying me in legal fees here in America by hiring American lawyers to do so, that is.
Since a pilot is mainly only needed for take off and landing 99.9% of the time, I'd bet not much longer. Getting from an to the ground are the hard parts. Even then, during optimal conditions, you probably don't even need the pilot, so it's likely you'll get pilots monitoring multiple aircraft from take off to landing and only interceding when an emergency arises. In time it'd probably become something they can do from their own homes. Then after they've collected enough data and trained the AI with it, they'll be able to do away with the human pilot altogether.
Any task humans do that don't rely on smell or taste you can train an AI to do. The problem is no longer if you can make a machine smart enough to do it, the problem now is do they have enough data to train it. By making pilots remote they'll be able to gather that data easily. Once we develop sensors that can perfectly mimic taste and smell, humans will only be needed for manual labor.
I agree with you up until the "hates employees" part. You're mistaking indifference for hate. The system doesn't give a shit about anyone who is not a capital owner collecting more capital. The plight of anyone outside of that group means nothing to the system.