I presume you're referring to the 2008 Chinese Milk Scandal? I'll point out this was something perpetrated by the Chinese industry, not American. It was knowingly covered up with the complicity of the Chinese government to prevent it from embarrassing the ongoing Olympics. Only when the scandal became impossible to cover up did the CCP take any action.

As of December 2025, San Francisco Mayor Daniel Lurie and former Mayor London Breed have both expressed praise for China and the relationship between San Francisco and Chinese cities.

Sure, I get that, but iPad? Laptop? PC?

Is your phone the thing you're going to be doing it on? And if it is, I guess it's nice that they're making $2500 morning news devices, but it still seems a bit crazy for the price.

I like a nice big screen as much as anyone, but after years and years of owning an iPad I'm using it less and less. And I honestly can't figure out why you'd want to tote around something that big all the time. Flights, I guess? A lot of traveling? I don't begrudge anyone buying one if they want it or they actually do have a day to day use for it, but I want my phone to get SMALLER.

The only folding phone I'll consider is the flip style, to reduce the carrying size. That would be handy to me, even if the folded dimensions are much thicker than my current phone. It'll still fit in a lot more pockets than the current form factor.

"even one time"

Unless you never use a password, in which case, you log in via all the other available options BUT password. You don't notice it missing. Passwords are so 1980s, get with the program.

I don't use biometrics because .. lets just say they are their own version of compromised. You cannot be compelled to give up your Password (legally) (hammer method is still valid) but a fingerprint, face ID etc that doesn't require you to speak can be compelled. I have no idea why people think it is "more secure" to use biometrics.

Look, it's not just that iOS 26 has bugs. Bugs are fine. All software has bugs.

But iOS 26 is incoherent. It makes the system less intuitive and harder to use. It reneges on design principles laid down in Apple's Human Interface guidelines. I don't even mind how flashy it is--the glass effect really IS cool sometimes. But touch targets are worse, information bleed-through is confusing, and it does the EXACT OPPOSITE of the claimed design intention to show you more of your content. The UI is bigger and more in your way at every turn. You can see less of what you want to see at any given time in a measurable way. (Seriously, people have measured it.)

Try this out: take a screenshot. Go into the screenshot interface. The control to delete the screenshot is under the checkmark, not the X. The X dismisses the screenshot but also deletes it, though it doesn't give any indication that it's going to delete the screenshot. Now if you take a screenshot of THAT screenshot, it adds a second one, fine. But if you go into the checkmark, your option is to delete BOTH. If you tap the X, NOW there's a control to delete just one.

Apple's stuff really did used to be simpler and more usable, based on tested and measurable design principles. Design wasn't just a look, it was also a science that included usability and interaction.

Alan Dye has ruined every interface he's come into contact with. I was on board with the iOS 7 flat-design revolution even with all its flaws, but we're in a whole different, unusable space now. Bring Scott Forestall back.

Anonymous Cowards, always stupiding up the comments.

We KNOW from survey data that people with trucks in North America rarely or never use the truck bed, and 70% never tow anything with it.

If that's true, they're not buying a truck because it's good at truck stuff, they're buying it for reasons that are superficial, because a truck is worse at literally everything to do with driving on roads than cars UNLESS they're towing or hauling something.

You can look it up yourself.

No, you can't.

It is nearly impossible to do the things you said unless you don't want to have a job, or eat, or participate in society in any way. I buy food at the farmer's market (when I can, which is to say, in the summer), I buy shampoo bars and get refills of various things in my resealable (plastic) containers. But my medication comes in a plastic pill bottle. I'm a programmer, so my computer has a certain amount of plastic in it. Even my bikes have a certain amount of plastic in them that I have absolutely no control over (or if not plastic, carbon fibre). (I have bikes because I haven't owned a car for 15 years now.)

There is no way out. The problem isn't us. We've been given no choice in so many of these matters. Particularly in North America, where train coverage is abysmal and the cities are built for cars. We KNOW who the 100 biggest polluters in the world are. We KNOW that carbon footprint is a scam concocted by the oil and gas industry to shift the blame from corporations to consumers, so people like you will do their propaganda for them. I want to keep living, so I buy things made out of plastic because I'm simply not offered a single other choice. I'll wager that my 'carbon footprint' is in the bottom quartile, and it doesn't matter, I still have to buy this shit and prop up the 'demand'.

Back in the day, we used to run "tarpit" SMTP servers which looked like an open mail relay but ACK'd incoming packets only just barely fast enough to keep the remote client from timing out and giving up. The theory was that tying up spammer resources was a net good for the internet, as a sender busy trying to stuff messages through a tarpit was tied up waiting on your acknowledgement, reducing their impact on others.

Similarly, perhaps the right answer here is to limit the number of concurrent connections from any one network range, and use tarpit tactics to rate-limit the speed at which your server generate contents to feed the bot -- just keep ramping down until they drop off, then remember the last good rate to use for subsequent requests.

It would perhaps be interesting to randomly generate content and hyperlinks to ever deeper random URLs -- are these new crawlers more interested in some URLs or extensions than others? If you pull fresh keywords from the full URL the crawler requested, will it delve ever deeper into that "topic"? If their Accept-Encoding header supports gzip or deflate, what happens when you feed them a zip-bomb?

Lots of people want full-sized pickups, unfortunately. The F150 has been one of the top selling vehicles in north america for literal decades, and while it used to be smaller, it's been pretty big for at least 10 years.

But the Lightning is SUPER expensive and a lot of the folks buying full-sized trucks are doing it for the optics. They want to appear tough and rugged, and they can't do that without a loud engine, I guess?

The depreciation on EVs is also astronomical. Pay $100k for a Lightning and it'll be worth $60k next year. There's no point in buying a brand new EV right now.

I agree that people SHOULD want smaller trucks, or—get this—CARS, but the big car companies love their margins. Ford's eliminated every passenger car in their lineup except for the Mustang (even the Mustang Mach-e is classified as an SUV for some reason).

It wasn't that subtle or oblique, tbh.