Do I think 20% of 7% of their trade surplus is a massive blow to their economy? No, I don't, because I can do basic math. The rest of your post is full of the same dumb shit you cusco of, although nobody can accuse you of not being a team player. Enjoy the ride, I guess.

"This is Chinese propaganda"

Do a quick self-learn. The amount of solar panels China was selling to the US before exports was only around 20% of their total solar module exports. Their total solar exports are only about 7% of their total intl trade surplus. They sell as much capacity to Europe in a year as the US has installed *total, nationally*.

I'm not arguing they don't care about loss of business to the US, obviously it impacts them.

But watching the US self-elect to fall farther behind, checking of boxes down a veritable "how to" list of losing US hegemony is far more valuable to them.

In that sense - maybe it is propaganda, but reverse psychology style, because you're doing the lord's work for them.

Additionally even the build-up costs to ISPs to get to these residences is per-capita small, because multitenant housing means that even if only a minority of units subscribe to the service, the costs to reach the premises is still spread out among multiple customers.

Granted, most of the carrier-integration I worked with was either metro optical ethernet or much older frame-relay connecting to points-of-presence where OC3s interconnected those points-of-presence, but in either case it was set up where the service provider came into a service-entrance room, and cabling left the service provider's equipment for some kind of physical demarcation point that acted as the official split between the service provider's responsibility and the on-premises tenant or property owner's responsibility. In our few multitenant buildings the service provider would do some on-premises work and actually place that demarc in the customer's own suite. This was not generally seen as being all that big a deal to do.

I would expect that large apartment complexes would already have a dedicated room for headend equipment, and that the service provider would use some other medium besides coaxial cable to get from that headend back to the central office, and between that headend equipment and the customer cablemodem would be normal coaxial cable run within the complex. Absolutely it is not a sure-thing that there would be sufficient customers to make this profitable, but that's a business risk that the provider should accept on getting into this line of business. We're not obligated to make their business model work for them, that's their responsibility to figure out.

I kind of get why it was buried, it came out a full two and a half years after the Macintosh was released, and basically three and a half years after the Lisa, which was itself arguably the same development track as the later Macintosh. It was also given a skinned GUI that looked a lot like the Macintosh Finder. There had also been several product iterations beyond the original Lisa and Macintosh that added external hard disk support and other useful features.

The only places I've seen Apple IIGS computers "in the wild" were when I was a kid in school. I expect that this was partly to allow the school district to continue using the educational/edutainment software that it had invested-in for the prior Apple II models. After all, the original Apple II debuted in 1977 and the IIGS the better part of a decade later in late 1986, and was produced until something like 1993. An organization that had a ton of software from their late-seventies or early-eighties Apple II computers might want to buy more Apple II models as legacy products. Even if there were some additional advances in the platform itself, the company behind that platform had already started to move on, and likely saw the Apple II line as having few development paths left going forward while still maintaining backward compatibility.

We saw the same sort of thing when Jobs returned to Apple and brought the legacy of NeXT with him, but because computer hardware had managed to become a lot more commoditized, general purpose, it was not as much a hardware issue as a software/OS issue. They maintained a virtual machine environment to run classic System within OSX to again allow those with investments in software for System to be able to continue using it (and to allow it to be used when there wasn't a version written for OSX specifically yet) but they certainly weren't looking to perpetuate the original Macintosh line once the models running OSX had supplanted them.

Don't mistake me, I'm not one to particularly celebrate Steve Jobs, and I've never been an Apple fanboy either, but it's not surprising that a company would discontinue one product line, even one that had been successful, when another product line with a lot more potential has come out and seen widespread adoption.

I'm pretty sure not one of these crypto companies could obtain, much less keep a banking license (at least, not in a proper country where you can't just buy your way in).

And you would be wrong. The first stablecoin bank, backed by billionaires who backed trump, was just approved by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency after a rigorous two month review (that's sarcasm in case you missed it).

Supposedly this "bank" will have to adhere to money laundering rules, but as we've seen with other digital money, that goes out the window because who needs regulations.

Most people are forced into relatively sedentary careers with long commutes

Because working from home would be completely different with the refrigerator only feet away or not having to do much more than roll out of bed.

Was it whitewashing to pull statues and rename schools?

Why would we want to honor traitors who wanted to keep slavery and who lost the battle?

How much have U.S. farmers grown this year which will sit and rot because not a single bean has been purchased by China due to tariffs?

While growing food isn't the main issue, distribution is, how many tons of food goes to waste each year because of price supports or deliberate over production due to government programs?

I'm not sure I completely understand you.

I would really like to see the catalog operators be held responsible for the new products that are sold through their publications, even if those are third-party sellers.

Yes, I am aware that this would cause a lot of headache for a whole lot of people. Frankly at this point I don't really care. These catalogs are not performing due diligence on what they're offering, and while it costs money to actually perform testing to ensure good products and it limits the number of function-alike competing products or badge-engineered products, what we're seeing now is an illusion of choice coupled to a race to the bottom quality-wise. If the catalogs for new products are held to account for what they sell then they may sell less crap and actually comparing between products would be easier for the consumer.

And that might be the crux of the problem. Bad enough to shill for Tesla given Musk, worse with the recent situation with ABC bowing to pressure on Jimmy Kimmel. Remember, that suspension was literally only three weeks ago. Those who canceled subscriptions are unlikely to go see it, it would come as no surprise if even those who weren't prepared to cancel subscriptions would simply shrug off purposely going to it, and given the extremely long time between movies it's not like they're particularly fresh in the minds of the audience anyway.

I have fond memories of the 1982 movie, even though as a child I was too young to have seen it in the theater and had to wait for it to be out on home video. I had low expectations for the 2010 sequel and frankly those low expectations were disappointingly met. I had no specific plans to ever see another sequel, and to top it off I'm not enamored with Disney at all right now as a final nail in the coffin.

Perhaps I am projecting here, but if the bulk of the potential audience doesn't care about the franchise and the company behind it has made itself undesirable then it's no surprise if it's not getting the sort of box office returns that they predicted.

grok? old enough to remember when grok was just a chess program.

Wait, you are saying you need a permit to burn tires? ,/EM>

If you don't want to dump all the burning toxins into the air, yes. Or don't you breathe where you come from?

I doubt Trump wants war, he's a businessman, not a soldier.

Yes, you are correct. The draft dodger is not a soldier and has little regard for the military, criticizing Gold Star families and mocking those who died.

However, the reason nothing will happen while he's around is because he admires Putin. Remember when he held up a picture of he and Putin after the Alaska meeting and said he was going to sign it and send it to Putin? It's the same reason he has not put real sanctions on Russia despite the Senate having the bill to act as a sledgehammer. Trump himself said back in July that Putin has 50 days to make a deal. Here we are 88 days after that statement and nothing has been done. He then followed up with a statement in the beginning of August where he said, "We have about eight days. ... We're going to put sanctions," he said. And yet, here we are, two months later and nothing.

Anything that would make Putin look bad, Trump won't do. He wants to do business in the country so any sanctions or military activity is the last thing he would do. His usual word salad is all we'll get.

Correction. A small price for accepting genocide.