Oh no, the organization is going to lose the $150 billion we pulled out of our ass!

This is a great development.

But I worry of a future report:

Unfortunately, In 2026 Samsung South Korea is projected to make a significant operating loss due to paying Smaugsun, a newly minted company in Liechtenstein, royalties equal to the revenue from selling the phones. No bonus for you.

Hopefully South Korean laws don’t let maneuvering like that fly.

I heard in February that the government paid for some parts so that essentially they have the place in line if they decide to get it, but it could be spare parts if we go with the mixed Saab fleet.

Was there more recent news toward an ultimate decision on that which I missed?

Probably a Japanese or Korean font. 過 probably shows up on the right as well for you.

Try ⾻ (ideograph U+2FBB) vs. 骨 (CJK “bone” used in Asian Typography, different Asian fonts may show differently).

The question’s confusing syntax reflects its tortured genesis: grievance politics in the prairies, improvised constitutional theory, personal ambition, infighting, backstabbing, bitter litigation – and an unprecedented data breach.

This one sentence really also does well to describe the Maple MAGA conservative movement overall.

Wozniak has come off to me as a consistently intelligent and stand-up guy throughout the years. It’s definitely worth taking his advice. The whole market and AI techbro industry is stuck in a follow-the-leader circlejerk so this is a refreshing take. I think it will be especially valuable when the AI hype train runs out of steam and the bubble pops.

Can I have one of the keys as a sample?

Good questions. At a minimum any VPN marketing in MN would need to tiptoe around claims that you can watch region locked content as if you were there.

Personally, I think VPNs that don’t receive or keep customers’ info and logs could have a credible argument that they don’t know whether their customers use it for prediction markets or not.

Here is the relevant text of the signed bill SF4760, make your judgement as you will:

81.23 Subd. 2. Prediction markets; hosting prohibited. A person is guilty of a felony if the 81.24 person, for consideration and as part of a business

…

82.14 (5) provides supportive services to a prediction market or consumer knowing that the 82.15 services will be used to identify a consumer’s location, transfer money, or make or process 82.16 payments for the purpose of allowing consumers to make wagers or to settle wagers made 82.17 by consumers in violation of this section.

Better than Lammy promising to cut children in jail awaiting trial by 25%.

Trump’s usual Sunday meal prep for TACO Tuesday… how many times have we been through this?

The robot should take the Amtrak instead of flying.

Camp outside their headquarters in Bellevue? /s

I’ll admit I have never thought about it before now.

Israel could save a boatload on their military and PR budgets if they, you know, stopped killing children and innoncent Palestinians, Lebanese and destroying infrastructure necessary for sustaining life.

You’re free to consider what I wrote as nonsense if you so wish. (Edit: The “simple objective fact” you wrote below I understand to be true as well, so there’s no need for us to argue any further about it.) Have an excellent day.

I’m not saying I won’t or one shouldn’t be vegan because of this, I’m saying the equating of leftism and veganism is wrong because of this.

I understand that, and I understand the overall personal health and societal benefits of reducing meat consumption. I proposed an upcoming alternative that wouldn’t require nearly any plant consumption, still all the power to you for making conscious decisions to reduce the environmental impact of meeting your needs if you practice veganism. Though for this post, what I’m doing here is applying the idea of moral circle expansion to demonstrate that people have different benchmarks to what they care about, which can be just humans, humans and animals, or also including plants and other organisms, to show that OP’s assertion that veganism = leftism is an incorrect blanket statement.

More or less. I’m not trying to debate why eating plants is better than eating animals, it’s about specifically the conflation of leftism with veganism. A leftist’s opinions of solidarity can apply to humans alone, allowing exploitation of animals. It can apply to animals but not plants, as would most vegans. It can apply to plants and all living things as well, in an effort to minimize the ecological impact of all human behaviour including agricultural impacts of harvesting plants and animals, as some environmentalists would (an example is the degrowth movement to show these aren’t imaginary arguments), and so I offered what could be a more positive alternative. Leftism is inclusive of all these things both broader and narrower than veganism. So my core argument is specifically that equating the two, as OP’s title and image has, is wrong. I think I’d agree with most that eating plants is more moral than eating animals, but to reiterate, I’m not trying to debate what constitutes sufficiently moral consumption, because I believe that varies based on each person’s judgement.