Yeah, I have my doubts. Cool in concept, but getting a radar that is that sensitive and able to track quick movements seems difficult.

The government has decided that pandemics are a hoax and as such do not exist.

That’s just the way a lot of economic policy works. A policy’s effects are not be instantaneous, but may take months or years before they are noticable depending on what they are. This lag often results in the next presidency experiencing the economic policies that were implemented by the previous presidency(s).

Can you come install one near me?

So at the absolute highest margin of error, Trump has a very small lead. Conversely the same could be true in the other direction and it could be 6.4 points ahead.

Desktop computers that have a vertically standing motherboard.

I like the ones that DO get stolen, because it’s an indication that they are that in-demand!

There are lots of potential ways, especially when you own a large social media platform that doesnt have rational reasons for blocking certain political content over others that skew a particular way.

Ah thanks for clarifying! I was confused how poutine was involved.

Guess Reddit liked the idea too and decided to expand on it, for profits

The glasses are just less obvious than me pointing my phone at you and snapping a picture

My senior dev was asked for his transcript and he’s been in the field for 25+years. He told them to get in touch with his college that doesn’t exist anymore. Suspect it’s a standard set of forms they need to fill.

Though, he’s got small hands so what could he possibly do? /s

Sorry, we had the settings misconfigured and “mildly” scorched your hippocampus.

Let’s be real parking illegally or not paying your debts is bad.

Seriously. Especially with the massive trade tarrifs he’s proposing… You think companies are just going to bend over and accept those extra expenses? No. They are just going to pass that expense onto the consumer as a cost of doing business.

Trump will argue with a cheeseburger

And will angrily eat it when it wins the argument

The article mentions and switches between “lawyers for the state said California” and “lawyers from then-California Attorney General Kamala Harris’ office”, which sounds like it’s intentionally conflating Harris’s direct involvement

This would make sense to include as something that is supplemental to the officers report to help corroborate facts. The question becomes what would happen when the AI summary and officers report conflict