Markets are apolitical. They hate chaotic change and restrictions on trade, especially when the specifics of the policy are nonsensical. Any president who did this could expect a similar market reaction. And things aren't back to where they are: S&P is down 8% since tariffs were announced and 15% since Trump took office. It'll take some time to retake lost ground since the threats of capricious tariffs and irresponsible leadership haven't gone away. Further, we've lost geopolitical influence by threatening the sovereignty of other nations, aligning with autocrats against our allies, and launching trade wars. Several countries have cancelled orders of F-35's and Starlink. Canadians seem set to boycott American brands for a generation. Not everything that happens in the market is the president's fault (we're overdue for a recession, so that played a factor in the drop as well), but these policies don't help.

What was controversial about it? I don't recall anyone defending the vessel, CEO, or company... It was pretty much an open-and-closed case of hubris and negligence.

Krita

Yep. XFCE4 is great for experimental VM's and old laptops while KDE is great for my main machine.

Nah, traditional liberal values like justice, liberty, fairness are fine, especially when set in a pro-American context that cautions against falling prey to one's own corrupting desires (the moral imperative for the superhero to use his powers for good instead of evil).

"Woke" has those values in caricature. 2D girl bosses who constantly show up evil white man-villian without meaningful struggle and character development. Black protagonists cast as morally flawless heros in decidedly non-Black historical contexts. Teams of predictively diverse and almost ugly characters who seem to be silently competing for some sort of off-screen "most weird" reward. Lots of sermonizing with little plot. Originality and creativity smothered by ideology instead of inspired by ideals.

I realize nuance and degree aren't popular concepts in the current political environment, but maybe, just maybe there's a reason that classical progressive characters were successful in cultivating wide fan bases and modern ones are adept at squashing them.

I keep hearing of this evidence for diversity, but scholarly results were scant when I went looking (and society is so polarized anyway I'm not sure who I could trust to be objective about it). Intuitively, I suspect that diversity helps when it's the right kind of diversity. Selling to the mass market? A diverse team (in the DEI sense) may help you reach further into different niches of society. Building a nuclear bomb? Well you probably want the smartest people from different scientific and engineering discipline even if they all look the same. In that scenario, diversity might help you by encouraging you to consider social outsiders that you might otherwise ignore (like the black female mathematicians who crunched the numbers for Apollo), but it could also saddle you with someone hired for what they looked like instead of what they could do (plenty believable from the anecdotes I've heard - but again where's some solid research one way or another?).

The real idiocy was wasting 12 years of his life chasing a lost opportunity. Time is our most precious resource.

The most likely outcome is that the city would be stuck with a huge cleanup bill supporting this guy's quixotic quest.

There is no "enough" for corporate capitalism. It turns out that when you abstract away ownership and hire sociopaths CEO's that concern for social impact is entirely eliminated excepting PR considerations.

I worry that so many people have such an absolutist, black and white view of the law. Sometimes you have to bend the rules a little bit to function effectively. It's why cities, for instance, pre-negotiate parking fines with FedEx etc... otherwise such delivery services couldn't serve urban environments. It's also why union members can "strike" without striking by following their employers' rules exactingly; this strategy of malicious compliance halts production because it's impossible for a bunch of suits to write down rules that effectively handle complex real world scenarios. The system needs human judgement and discretion to deal with novelty.

At the same time, we shouldn't let the Chinese government have power I've us that it shouldn't have.

But his mind didn't go to theft... He described a mutually beneficial "favor economy" he shared with a neighbor whereas you're coming at it from a "respectful separation" standpoint. This is not a hard left/right distinction. I suspect it's more of a high trust vs low trust community thing, with suburban paranoia helping drive a lot of isolating behaviors in the case of the respectful separation viewpoint.

The legitimate use of violence is not the sole prerogative of the state.

(4) Perjury

(5) Making false statements to a public official in the execution of their duties

Could just be pitted windshields: https://www.seattlemet.com/new... This happened back in 2020 too and it turned out to be Starlinks: https://www.popsci.com/technol...