They're "AI Native". This maps with how the entire "AI revolution" has felt to me - like no due diligence has been done to validate the output of anything, and instead just the "AI" stamp is enough to satisfy investors.

This is what I'm wondering. How dysfunctional is microsoft that they shipped a react-based start menu? It reads like satire, "Windows 11 is so bad that even microsoft doesn't use native controls".

MS also made one of the most hated IM and audiovisual meeting applications with web tech, replacing a previously (not great but much better) native one: Teams.

It's not React. It's React Native. React Native and React are about as similar as JavaScript and Java.

React Native is a way of orchestrating a UI comprised of native controls.

It's still baffling, since the core idea of React only makes sense as a workaround for limitations of the browser DOM. Wrapping much more flexible 'native' widget frameworks with a React layer is pure cargo culting (same with SwiftUI).

Yeah, but is that a good thing? I think the lack of those conceptual boundaries are exactly why computers are so difficult to learn for some people. Access to web services, and the services themselves, still aren’t reliable enough to support this idea of a completely transparent computer experience where you don’t need to know what machine a file is on.

Uvalde was the moment my hopes for the future of this country died. The parents there voted to reelect the same people who stood around and let a solitary madman murder their children just a little while later.

To be fair, OK is rock bottom in things like literacy rankings and likely income as well. Something like that would not have gone over will in New Jersey. US is a patchwork quilt of very different places.

> It’s pretty damned hard to completely secure any area from a potential attack when all one side needs is a drone.

Man, maybe the US should have had a contingency plan to address the drone issue before launching an unprovoked attack.

> That’s a pretty specific high bar

It's the bar that matters.

The best part is that Ukraine wanted to sell us their anti-drone tech to us a year ago and Trump and co didn't see fit to pursue it.

Did they not know that the Shahed-136 has seen massive fucking use in Ukraine by Russia? Did they not think that Ukraine now being able to shoot like 75%+ of them down might be an indication that, if we are planning to start some stupid pointless war with the country that makes these drones, it might be a good idea to have that same capability?

Or did they think we have an infinite ammo cheat, and we can just launch an infinite number of missiles that cost millions of dollars to shoot down a drone that costs tens of thousands?

We had literally years of intelligence on the capabilities of these drones. The admin claims "We thought it was Zelensky being Zelensky. Self promotion" - but we know how successful their anti-drone capabilities are. We have the data! YOU JUST HAD TO TALK TO THE PEOPLE TO VERIFY IT. The sheer incompetence of these people is astounding.

Good news/bad news, our current leaders are far too incompetent to successfully plan and execute a regime change operation. Bad news is they're stupid enough to try anyway and have a lot of weapons.

The Iran war was one of the biggest economic boons Russia could hope for; the disruption of oil and gas exports from Middle East with the associated spike in global prices brought Russian economy back from the dead, as now their exports are so much more valuable.

It's not the first time I see comments similar to this and I honestly can't even begin to grasp how anyone can think that the US is in any way shape or form at risk from Iran.

If it spends enough to trigger the debt bomb literally pounding sand, that could do it. It isn't Iran that is the danger though. The US could just walk away any time and be fine.

And leave their “partners” to clean up the mess?

I'd argue that Vietnam and Al-Qaida/Afghanistan/Iraq where much lesser "risks" than Iran, and those still left lasting scars on US society, self-image and standing.

I'm sure people said the same about the USSR invading Afghanistan.

The US right now cannot keep its bridges from collapsing. It cannot keep its children safe from men with guns. It cannot keep its citizens fed or housed. It is failing to provide adequate healthcare for a majority of its population, it cannot even keep its children vaccinated against measles. Our science agencies are being run by crackpots. Our mass media is being combined under one single owner.

This doesn't even consider the impending existential challenges of climate change.

And this nation, instead of fixing its crumbling domestic infrastructure - educational systems, health care systems, or anything that would benefit the citizens of the US - has chosen to launch an attack against a foreign nation that has already cost 10s of billions of dollars and will likely cost vastly more.

All the political and economic capitol that is required to maintain and improve stable conditions is instead being poured into murder in a desert thousands of miles from home.

Which regime is trying to be changed though? The backlash to starting a war for no credible reason and tanking the world economy along with increased fuel prices could conceivably force a regime change in the USA.

The US regime is changing with the next presidential election regardless of the outcome (or lack thereof) of this war. Short of a nuclear exchange or China invading Taiwan or San Francisco, nothing is changing that.

He already tried to overturn one election. What makes you think that he wouldn't try again?

There are quite explicit constitutional limits to his ability to be elected to a third term. Short of a mitary-style takeover, there is nothing he can do to change that (discounting the scenario of constitutional amendment).

The same limits he ignored in 2021?

Who would be enforcing those constitutional limits? I didn't think that a convicted felon could run for president, but here we are.

It's just a possibility given the co-opting of ICE agents into performing like Trump's private army. I'd much rather never see that happen and have to live with making a dumb comment.

> Classic Hollywood, completely detached from reality. Did they propose any way for The Pirate Bay to continue earning any revenue, paying for its hosting, and developing new features, if they aren't allowed to redistribute movies for free?

If you had separated them, 365 would probably run on AWS and have better cross-browser support.

> A lot of regular homeowners fight new developments tooth and nail.

In a system where those with more capitol have more power, homeowners are the powers that be. They're more likely to vote and have more money for discretionary spending - like donating to politicians.

People have been steered for decades into using their home as a vehicle for retirement. Of course they want to protecet it.

I'm not blaming individual homeowners, there are very strong incentives for treating homes like retirement investments. It's an issue of policy, but we do have to address that it is also causing rent to rise and contributing to the homelessness crisis.

They’re a troll account, only a few days old.