You may very well be right! I didn't mean to come off saying you are wrong, just that Revenue isn't a proxy. IKEA on the other hand I very highly doubt has a higher market cap. Retail typically has high Revenue and low margin, like Walmart
I really feel that Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith[0] is going to have a big effect on this type of thing. They are basically relying on their AI magic to make it transformative. I'm starting to think the era of learning from material other people own without a license / permission is going to end quickly.
Vans are usually a lot better equipped than traditional motorhomes. Before vanlife, a motorhome (in Europe; I don't know about the US) was basically just for driving from home to a campsite, without the hassle of towing a caravan (travel trailer). The batteries were maybe enough to power the lights while you cook dinner and the only way to charge them was by hooking up to mains. The water tank was tiny, barely enough water to wash up, and the toilet needed to be emptied every other day.
Today an off-grid van will have two or three ways of charging the batteries, enough water to last a week, a toilet that needs emptying once every few months, and a heater and enough insulation to comfortably camp in the next big freeze. Traditional manufacturers are starting to realise some of these things, but most are still primarily designed to be used on a campsite with a mains hookup.
This must be regional/cultural because for my family and friends socks is the kiss-off gift of a person who doesn't give a damn about you but needs to buy you a gift.
Definitely regional/cultural because in my region, socks would be something given within family or close friends. I've never seen an acquaintance or a company give socks here. (Not that I would mind to receive some, good socks are a great gift, it's just that it's not done here).
Yeah. I would be weirded out if my company gave me socks. Cups and coats are more the norm. Well, cash has been the go to recently. Cash doesn't offend anyone.
Ending legacy admissions is a very quick way to reduce alumni donations.
I get the feeling that legacy admissions are actually a benefit for other students because it means that powerful families can become part of your social network. That is a big difference from a state school.
I doubt it- is anyone asking the Supreme Court to end legacy admissions? If not, it is unlikely they will rule on it, though it is possible some opinions, most likely desenting ones, may mention it.
Hmm, I haven't been following the details of the case, but this prompted some digging. It looks like the suit is not seeking a court ruling on legacy admissions, but that the group behind it is advocating for elimination of them. They have argued that eliminating legacy admissions would do a better job of ensuring diversity. Harvard is arguing that they need legacy admissions to get alumni financial support, and that affirmative action is being used to offset the discriminatory effects of legacy admissions.
So while the court is unlikely to force elimination of legacy admissions (no one has asked for that directly, but it is possible that they find some reason to take it to that), they very well might address it and whether or not they believe it to be viable.
I get the feeling the ruling on Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith will point how the Supreme Court will see this. I'm starting to think that the entity who owns the data used for training should own the output.
Apple transitioned from x86 to ARM in less than a year.
Apple started a lot earlier than the announcement and hasn't completed the transition yet (Mac Pro). A lot of companies better have had RISC-V initiatives in the pipeline already.
