I wish this worked a little better. It doesn't solve motion sickness for me when looking at my phone in a car, but it does seem to make it a little less severe.

I agree with you, but even then it's still going to be someone's backyard

I feel like you're suffering from some sort of confirmation bias.

I've worked under a top talent CEO, and the company collapsed. He made some gambles and they just didn't work out. I am not convinced that a third-rate version of him would have done significantly worse.

Is it just that the company collapsed? The third-rate version of him probably would have ended up in jail a-la SBF or Ms Holmes, with hopefully no one getting killed or maimed, or chemicals in a factory causing cancer across neighborhoods or poisoning wells or something.

There are things worse than losing your job.

Only truly exceptional executives can be SBF or Elizabeth Holmes.

There's also Madoff.

Or maybe the third rate version would have made different choices, and those may have due to pure chance worked out well for us.

That's what happens when you make them the most highly-funded police force in the world. They start looking around for new jurisdictions.

ICE shipping out to Hormuz when.

I'm not even convinced that this fits your definition. A distillation "attack" doesn't evade the security system in the sense of hacking past a login. The only part of the "security system" that it bypasses is the Terms of Service. And that's only after said data was acquired legally and correctly and normally.

It's a post-facto attack, which doesn't sit right linguistically to me.

That's understating things. The efforts to violate the ToS involve what amounts to large scale organized fraud. But I'm not convinced that should be considered an "attack" rather than merely "piracy" and I certainly don't feel like there's any ethical issue. It's nothing more than an attempt to politicize competition.

Tends to have a lot of unfortunate pushback from the well-connected people who like to live on coastlines.

A wind turbine which is ~30 miles from shore can't be seen from the coast because of the curvature of the earth. Do you actually think you'll get more opposition to a wind farm nobody can see from shore with a 30 mile undersea power cable that correspondingly doesn't require any use of eminent domain, than needing to seize a line of land 1500 miles long for a transmission line?

That has nothing to do with it. Congress should still have to declare an operation like what is happening in Iran.

How would a future president ever be motivated to give power back to Congress I wonder? A coup by congress?

as the term rule of law suggest the legislative branch has the power to make the rules

I really hope that next time they do their job vetting nominations for the judicial branch.

IMO most of these appointments should be done by congress itself, the only reason they are done by the executive is because the role of president was a created on the template of the role of king.

except that without a "prime minister" now there is no separation between the "king" and the fulcrum of political power.

> Also USA is very sensitive about the other side's civilian deaths.

I'd argue that it's not sensitive enough. We've bombed schools and desalination plants.

If your goal in a war is to topple a regime and prop up a more friendly one, then you can't just bomb them to submission. All that does is topple the regime and replace it with a probably worse one. You need to convince the population that the new regime is actually better, and you don't convince anyone of anything by killing their kids.

I believe in a "reasonable expectation of privacy" standard. A drone could hover outside my window watching me, but I don't think that would make people feel comfortable.

FTA: They are not used to chase active criminals.

I believe this is based on actual average usage, not by assuming the vehicles are full.

Which would be even worse, since existing mass transit is naturally concentrated in the places where it can operate with high capacity, and it thereby has a higher existing average than passenger cars. Lots of mostly full commuter trains, not a lot of 8-passenger SUVs that actually have 8 passengers.

When the the proposal is to add more mass transit, it would then have to go in the places it currently isn't, i.e. the places where it would have to operate at lower capacity. Which leads to the problem described.