Thanks! Usually I get these fine, but this one was just going to keep on whooshing right over my head.

I vaguely remember him running for a presidential nomination and that he said some ridiculous stuff (though I don't remember what he said anymore). Is the reference more recent? Since someone else mentioned it, does this have to do with how he died, apparently?

Nothing about whether he spoke back. 😅

I don't know what the landscape is like in the gaming industry these days so I can't say if it's the case here, but often that kind of pattern is about eliminating competition (i.e. market manipulation rather than innovation).

Looks to me like they were talking about (or to, as the case may be) Hoekstra.

Scary to see this around the same time Carney's govt here in Canada decided to give themselves the power to overrule Health Canada bans on toxic pesticides if they ever feel like it.

OK, that clinches it. I've had a feeling since the first time I saw this graphic that there was some sympathetic background worker at Fox News who purposely made the thing look as appealing as possible. "Culture war" issues are still kneejerk, hot button topics for a lot of that audience.

Or a wealth hoarder who wished they could take it with them when they died.

C-suite hopefully got a taste of reality when OpenAI and Anthropic tried to charge token-based rates that covered their actual costs. Suddenly nobody was willing to pay and rates had to be slashed again! (I think this was all in the last month or two.) More and more enterprises will probably be downloading one of the free open-weight models and developing their own in-house setup (which would at least be more resource efficient).

They're not done digging their financial holes so they'd just spend a bailout right away and keep on digging. It's not that they got into a debt that's hard to keep up with. It's that the entire industry has no working model that covers the cost of doing business. Ed Zitron has laid this out in multiple articles and interviews (and probably on his podcast).

The thought did cross my mind that Internet cafes may offer too much anonymity for the liking of the ones pushing all these surveillance laws globally.

For someone with your username, that sounds incredibly eugenicist (choosing who can vote), and more typical of someone who believes in liberalism to say (the elitism in blaming people who fall for the propaganda instead of the propagandists themselves). Surely this kind of language plays a part in disenfranchising people who are simply misinformed. Kind of counterproductive.