"And, they continued layoffs they started"

FTFY. Layoffs have been for how long, and where? For centuries, and everywhere.

Again, you're being willfully obtuse by taking a "very loose definition" of what (or, rather, does not) "probably" constitute "ultra processed" and attacking on the details. Everything on your list (again, other than coffee and tea, along with some spices) has been "produced at home" for millennia, and the things on your list that haven't don't have anything to do with whether they could be, but only the geography of where they could be. Just like your follow up "but I don't have land" bullshit.

"Milk" is not an ultra processed food (or, rather, it doesn't have to be). Something containing "red dye #5" is. You need a factory and a complicated supply chain for the red dye #5, but not for the milk. See how easy that was?

With regard to your follow up WRT cheese, come the fuck on. Cheese is nothing more than a way of preserving milk. You can make some in your home today, and the knowledge required to do so can be obtained by watching a five minute Youtube video. Really, five minutes. That's all. Will you have Le Grand Gruyere? No, you'll have farmer's cheese, or ricotta, or mozerella, or maybe a nice gouda if you're feeling frisky and want to wait a bit.

Actually, causality can and will be violated - dispense with the notion that it can't and you might start to get somewhere.

The fact that CEO positions just attract and filter-out broken people is well known however we hadn't realized they weren't just sociopathic but also stupid.

Most of your list could be "produced at home" by most people. Tea and Coffee are the largest problem on the list, but the only reason is geographic and not "processing" related. I'm pretty sure you know that, though, and are being purposefully obtuse for some reason.

Which is the bot-driven sales. Followed by commission sales agents enabling the process.

I may never see another major act in person. Just don't want to participate in the fraud.

Has anything actually stored hashes in /etc/passwd in the last thirty years?

"Yo, dawg..."

I know a few who would take the extra money and see a quack doctor. I did, for instance. Good enough results to recommend them.

Much as I agree with you from a moral standpoint, from a legal standpoint it is not as cut and dried as you make it out to be.

If you want to make the argument that "data about you" is "your data" that's fine, but the presumption here is that it's the airline's data, and it is offering it freely (as in speech, not as in beer) to the government. Where is the fourth amendment implication? It is not your "house, person, papers, or effects," it is the airline's and they're happy to let the government sort through it.

Sigh. No it isn't. The airline is not a provider of medical services, it is not regulated by HIPAA.

While I agree that this is not something I want the government to be doing, what part of a database maintained by the airlines constitutes your person, house, papers, or effects? If the government demands access that would be one thing, but if the airlines say "hey, wanna buy our data?" and the government says "hell yeah" that is something else.

I found a brain that's been "softened" - what do I win?

Apparently, "safeguards" mean "don't let the AI say something that hurts feels" rather than "don't let the AI act in a manner that is dangerous and unlawful." I say this because, apparently, Anthropic's systems have been leveraged by nation state actors for hacking campaigns (though details of this are minimal and read like marketing spiel about how awesome their tools are rather than giving information on what actually happened).

Agreed he's truly despicable. I'll also agree with dangerous as anyone who has that much money is dangerous by definition. There is nothing wrong with my understanding of ethics or principle. I also think SpaceX succeeds in spite of Musk and not because of him.

With all of that said, I fail to see how anyone's proclivities or politics play into whether or not a company they own will succeed at any given objective. I'd further argue that if you believe that someone is dangerous, you're fucking stupid if you pretend that they cannot achieve things that are clearly within their (demonstrated) capability to achieve, and the only thing you accomplish is convincing people they're less dangerous than they are.