Yes but the company in question has no motive to sue. They aren't named and any lawsuit would be completely fraught and easily dismissed. On top of that, they would be revealing themselves by suing. It gets more complicated if they are named and now have an actual reason.
This is meta because the immediate flagging of anything tangentially related to Musk or Trump is tiring and the exact opposite of critical thinking. Despite knowing that Hacker News rulers love Musk and Trump, I would expect better from the alleged critical thinking community. If this were Google instead of Grok, it would be front page. Oh wait, it was Google at one point[0] and it was front page.
White South Africans only trauma is that apartheid no longer exist. South Africa has the largest wealth disparity with 0.1% of South Africans taking 25% of the wealth. I can tell you those 0.1% aren't black.
West Virginia is a welfare state and the 3rd most dependent on federal funding. California actually gives more money than it gets from the fed. Most red states aren't subsidizing anything, they are the ones living off subsidies. Transit funding at the federal level supports ALL states. Projects in red states are being built due to the transit infrastructure bill passed under Biden.
As I mentioned in another comment, Project 2025 calls for cuts to public transit and instead giving funding and subsidies to private companies like Uber or Lyft to provide transit. Republicans already hate funding transit so how do these easy remedies appear to you? If transit was properly funded, Uber wouldn't have done this to begin with.
Project 2025 calls for massive cuts to public transit and instead give money and tax breaks to companies like Uber and Lyft to provide transit instead. This is just Uber getting ready for that phase of the plan.
There is more luck involved with getting rich than you might think. Mark Cuban once said if he had to start over he would have no problem becoming a millionaire but becoming a billionaire is completely dependent on luck.
Some people might say there is more to life than making money but if you just want to hopefully get some naive investors to give you a large pile of money for your vaporware then go for it, it's where the money is.
You're being sarcastic but yes. If your intention is to take large sums of cash from investors and run off with a fat check then that is exactly what you should do.
I need someone to convince me this isn't one of the biggest waste of money on an acquisition. If OpenAI can't build an official IDE for less than 3 Billion then what are they even doing? Windsurf can't have that high of a userbase that you feel the need to pay for it.
Courts don't have balls to do anything. They could introduce sanctions or deputize anyway to arrest people in the Trump for violating court orders and refuse to do so.
The GOP is completely mask off and is fine with Trump turning the country into Mussolini Italy if it means they get a seat at the table. They are traitors and I hope every one of them has their day in The Hague.
Obviously. Money isn't free any more, times are uncertain, both businesses and individuals are cutting back. The recession isn't coming, we are already in it.
This is what has happened although I'm not sure it has manifested in the way the author believes or wants. What the right has done, for example, is create supporters that irrationally attach their sense of being to them and deny or block out anything that goes against what they are told to believe. Both stories they present at the beginning can be true at the same time.
You're one of these people that get off on being technically correct even though it has no value to the discussion at large. No, 100% of Brits were not surveyed and all said no and as I said in another comment, the poorest of the country would likely buy it because it would be the cheapest option.
Domestic farmers are not all in the same company. They compete amongst each other under the same set of rules they must all abide by. I have no idea why they would agree to sell an inferior product that doesn't have to abide by the same set of rules.
The UK has very strict requirements around certain foods that their farmers have to meet. Allowing US farmers to bypass those requirements will undercut those domestic farmers and while individual consumers may still opt for the more expensive domestic option, restaurants and takeout businesses will usually opt for the cheapest option which introduces it to the country even if the consumers don't want it. It's not like McDonalds has a sign that says "Made with US Chicken!" on your nuggets. Secondly, allowing cheap US chicken just penalizes the poorest in your country that will go for the cheapest option to survive. Some people don't have choice and food standards help bring the bottom up.
This is true of a lot of our food. Trump, now and in 2016, has been trying to force the UK to buy US chicken and the Brits are NOT having it because US food standards are below that of the UK.
You don't need to define fair because that is not what the Fairness Doctrine is about. The Fairness Doctrine says on some topics, you must give or allow someone else to give the opposing view as well.
That is my point. They do not care about bias in media just like they don't care about government inefficiency or illegal immigration. There are easy wins you could make towards fixing all of these things if you wanted to but they choose not to because they don't care. They want fear, authority, and control.
If he actually cared about unbiased media, he would reinstate the Fairness Doctrine which he won't do because that would kill Fox, Newsmax, and the rest of the Republican propaganda outlets.