Nostalgia.

There’s been a blatant push by media to forward the idea that Luigi did it. All they have to do is … not report evidence to the contrary. What there IS, however, is a lack of evidence that he did it, if you take into consideration the fact that NYPD - who have a history of faking evidence - probably used a gun and fake manifesto to pin the crime on him. Innocent until proven guilty has gone out the window; even news outlets aren’t bothering to hedge their language with ‘alleged’ any more.

Because it’s beneficial for the software company’s reputation. People are more likely to buy the software when they know that it’s not going to get a permanently unpatched zero-day the moment the next version comes out.

The problem is that we see that sort of argument all the time on the internet, which gives us a skewed view of Republicans. The right wing is loud, even leaving out the shills trying to stir the pot.

Not even close to all software. There was a broad mix of stuff that used 2-digit years that would have had problems with it, stuff that used 2-digit years where it wouldn’t really impact anything, and stuff that used 4-digit years and so wasn’t a problem.

However, if it drove any sort of critical infrastructure, it had to be audited just in case it fit in the first category.

My dude, just because the Catholic Church won’t stop being the Catholic Church doesn’t make a progressive pope a bad idea.

Her.

edit: Ah, I see you’ve already been called out for this. Admittedly that’s why I tend to default to ‘they’ on the interwebs.

Oh no!

Anyways…

Well you see, there’s a simple explanation for this. When we do it, it’s good, and when you do it, it’s bad.

Everyone except for the people who get sent to El Salvador…

It’s possible to have a poor opinion of the Chinese government without having a bigoted opinion about the Chinese people.

Yup! Totally plausible - just more expensive and less repeatable. And harder to use against moving targets.

Although you are correct, this destroys the engine.

A good, efficient fusion engine just needs to point the exhaust end towards the enemy and the hyper-accelerated particles will punch a hole through the target for you. And then you point at the next target, etc. etc.

Also, it’s a butchered quote from Larry Niven’s Known Space books, referred to as the “Kzinti Lesson” - because the Kzinti thought humanity was unarmed and helpless until they discovered that humans are really good at improvising weapons.

Even if they do know, they almost certainly are buying into the ‘he’s a criminal and deserves to be deported’ bit.

Sigh. Yet another article assuming Mangione’s guilt. Ben Burgis didn’t even bother to say ‘allegedly’ anywhere.

The usefulness of a fusion engine as a weapon is directly correlated to its efficiency.

Cars shouldn’t jump up and down due to road quality.

I live in a hilly area. Any time someone with projector headlights is on even a slight downward curve that I’m facing, it’s the equivalent of brights in my eyes. Even with adaptive headlights, cresting a ridge would still blast anyone on the other side for the short amount of time it takes for your car to realize there’s someone there.

For point 3… You’re right, and you’re wrong. Light from point sources instead of diffuse sources is worse for your retina. The light gets focused by your eye’s lenses onto a much smaller area, which can potentially damage the sensitive photoreceptor cells. Ideally, there would be regulations that limit a headlight’s candles per mm^2 rather than just overall candles. Astigmatism makes it so the light glares across half your vision, which makes it worse for seeing other things on the road besides the headlight glare, but conversely makes it better for not murdering your retina because the light is spread across a wider area.

You misunderstand the point of an aircraft carrier. It’s not any more defensible than other large, floating objects - but first you have to reach it, and the aircraft it carries are capable of blowing up nearly anything to kingdom come before it gets anywhere close. Carriers aren’t for defense. They’re for projecting power.

Well, then the problem would be solved anyways!

The owners of the largest military in the world will make it everyone’s problem before it gets better.