... the vast majority of code used when creating new things come from libraries that someone else already wrote. There's nothing scary about that (unless there's bugs, but I digress). AI might help me be more efficient at delivering results, but I'm not sensing AI is getting anywhere close to replacing me.

You beat me to it. There's plenty of precedent now that the EU doesn't mess around with consumer protection, and the enforcement thereof.

Context for "eye for an eye" in the Old Testament: Justice should not be based on revenge or excessive malice. In other words, the punishment should fit the crime (and not more than that), which was contrary to much of surrounding culture then. But those words get twisted to mean that taking revenge is ok, and Jesus effectively denounces this interpretation in Matthew 5:38.

...invest in more redundancy to the global internet backbone to make sabotaging things like this less appealing.

I'll take that into consideration, thanks. I use Ubuntu for work, but not for personal use, so my knowledge for that use case is limited. I'll check out Mint. Thanks again.

Yeah I haven't looked hard at it yet. I'll be curious about drivers and Steam support.

Likely will move to ubuntu next year.

Title needs correction. Those those two things are very different and conflating them give very misleading impressions.

The problem is the way student loans work, coupled with high school seniors not making wise financial decision with said loans. It created this artificial economy where colleges had to become this heaven on earth experience in order to compete with the other college down the road. The whole system is addicted to government student loans. Hate to say it, but this sort of correction needs to happen. The longer this goes on the worse it will be. The mindset of "higher education" needs to go away. College should be just the next step after high school, nothing more.

Don't forget putting any non-secular religious belief, especially Christianity, in a positive light.

Not quite. The difference before is explicitly calling it a lease even when your competitors don't. That would be a competitive disadvantage. Now it's a level playing field.

That's not true. If that were the case then what's the point of grades in the first place? Just pure "education" already has a perfect solution - audit the courses. I hear you though that a grade can't be hyper-tuned to a specific employer. However, it still needs to carry relevance, and that relevance is defined outside of the ivory tower.

Sorry, but as a CS Ph.D. who works in high-tech industry, your institution's guidelines are just as bad as the participation trophies philosophy. Both extremes skew what people outside of academia really want to know when hiring: how qualified/competent is a person. It's an objective measure, not a relative one, period. Is a certain topic easier, and lots of people are good in it to do a job? Great. Is it harder to master, and few people are good at it? Good to know. Someone getting a low grade because they missed the trick/ambiguous/obscure test questions that profs use to artificially make subjects harder than they really are - the stuff NO ONE outside of academia gives a flying rip about? That's a tragedy. That could mean an otherwise qualified candidate got passed over. Personally, I don't think any faculty who's never worked in industry has any business saying what an "A" vs. "B" vs. "C" student ought to be. They call it an "ivory tower" for a good reason.

When someone leaves voluntarily: 1. No severance pay. 2. 2 weeks (usually) to spin up replacement, or at least document any special sauce that employee used for their job. So less risk for the company losing key competencies. 3. No need to worry about retention bonuses for those who stay (in the case of large layoffs).