AshleyGrant

And I'm a guy named Ashley who hates being called Ash. Takes all kinds.

Honestly, even if your brother is right, who cares? I find it quite enjoyable to watch other folks play sports. So I'm going to continue to watch live sports.

Which sports I watch may change over time, as companies like Disney (ESPN) ruin one sport after another with too many ads and especially too much in-game gambling content, but I'll likely keep watching sports.

> i (sic) assume that your real goal is to end all immigration enforcement.

You can make that assumption. You would be wrong. But you are free to make that assumption.

> My question is: suppose they have such suspicion.

Then take it to a court and convince a judge to sign a warrant (it's not like it's that difficult). No different from other criminal investigations.

Standing US law disagrees with you.

This explains why it took GitHub 5+ minutes to acknowledge a push to a PR branch.

No. "They" cheered when it was used to deplatform hate speech.

Deplatforming people organizing a peaceful protest is very different. If you cannot understand how that is different, then I worry about your critical thinking skills.

Conflating deplatforming hate speech and deplatforming people organizing a peaceful protest is certainly a choice.

> supposing a person is likely to be present without authorisation in the country, and is unable to offer any evidence of citizenship, then what?

Then don't arrest them and send them to a concentration camp would be a great start. The onus should be on the arresting officer to have a reasonable suspicion that the person in question is in the US without proper authorization (with reasonable suspicion being a pretty high bar, much higher than it currently is).

We have a court system. ICE even has their own special extra-judicial court system. There is absolutely zero need to proactively be disappearing people just because some guy who's only training is that Family Guy meme decided that this particular brown person needs to have their life destroyed.

Also, these detention centers are horrific and something history will not judge kindly, especially given that "the cruelty is the point" seems to be the guiding light for the folks building them.

36 US citizens being incorrectly and illegally arrested is 36 too many. Period. End of story.

Demand better of our government, not "eh, you have to break a few eggs to make an omelet."

And businesses that are offered the option of paying "protection money" can simply go out of business, right?

Acting like YouTube is a service that is not functionally required to use in the modern world is a disingenuous argument at best and intellectually dishonest at worst.

There is so much content that folks end up needing to access for so many valid reasons that is only available on YouTube. Plenty of companies only post troubleshooting explainers on YouTube, as one example. I am not "choosing to visit" YouTube in those cases, I am forced by a third party. And I'm being forced because YouTube has functionally built a monopoly on this type of content.

You might as well be telling someone to "Just buy a helicopter and fly yourself" because they are unhappy with the quality of roads in their city.

This is like saying "You can just sail to Europe for your week of meetings." While it may be pedantically true, it's absolutely false from a functional standpoint for most people.

YouTube holds an absolutely dominant position in user created content. I have purchased products from many companies who post their troubleshooting video content on YouTube and only on YouTube. In many cases, those videos are literally the only content they provide. They do not provide any textual troubleshooting content.

Telling people "Just don't use YouTube" is a functionally useless piece of advice as they cannot "just not go there."

Also, I'm a paying customer of YouTube, why would I "have not right to set the terms they offer their services by?" Why is it that Google gets dictator-level control over the relationship, especially when they are operating as a monopoly?

We the People absolutely have the power to dictate terms to Google or any other company.

Edit to my comment, I meant "Despite them being common," not "Despite them being complex."

The Raptor v3 had a 7% (3/39) failure rate on yesterday's Starship Flight 14. As others have mentioned, Falcon 9 uses the Merlin engine, which is a completely different, much lower complexity engine.

Despite them being complex, high-bypass turbofan engines ARE exotic technology. There are vanishingly few countries/companies that have the expertise necessary to produce the single crystal fan blades used in the engines of these aircraft.

As far as the SR-71, its engines were turbojets that transitioned to ramjets above Mach 2ish. They required a special grade of jet fuel and a dedicated fleet of refueling aircraft.

I rather doubt an SR-71 successor would use a turbofan. The mission profile really doesn't require it. I would expect it to be a turbojet that transitions (as you said) to a ramjet and eventually a scramjet.

I would love to see the SR-71 fly again, if only from a nostalgia standpoint, but I really doubt this effort will be successful. I doubt even more that much of value can be accomplished by getting one to be flyable again that couldn't be achieved in a much more cost-effective manner via unmanned aircraft.

Because in OP's hypothetical, it is the equivalent of a gangster saying "I can shoot you in the face or punch you in the face, which do you prefer?"

They present a false choice where Google is saying "We can do this the easy way or the hard way" and we are forced to choose between bad and worse. There is no reason we should not have a less bad choice: the same amount of ads but non-targeted. We, as customers, should not be held hostage by the massive corporations.

^ 2026 in a nutshell

There is no reason we have to make the false choice you present. That is simply Google holding a gun to our heads to encourage us to choose something that is in Google's best interests rather than our own.

The choice should be between X targeted ads or X non-targeted ads. They can still target ads based on the content of the page, no different from how television and print ads worked prior to all of this data collection.

That the company can use the fact that a customer purchased something is completely separate from tying that information to me.

And they should not be able to sell that data to data brokers, whether is anonymized or tied to individual customers.

And we even have an explicit example of this in the 21st Amendment repealing the 18th Amendment.

The father of a girl I dated in college (circa 2000s) built an entire student tracking system using FileMaker to use at the High School he was the Principal of.

We didn't date for long, but I'd be curious to know how long that system ran.

I saw rusted out cars and trucks all over the place when I visited northern Minnesota and the UP of Michigan last year. Even late-model cars that couldn't have been more than 5-10 years old had rusted out rocker panels.

Please add the ability to sit in a window seat. It'd be awesome to also be able to pick a seat.

Also, the login UI is annoying, it'd be nice if it was hidden by default.

Another thing that might be fun to add is to see if you can get a data feed of filed routes used by airliners for the chosen route and fly that route instead of simply flying direct.

GitHub Copilot in VS Code has a similar feature to "Fork" a conversation at any point in its history.

You can't trade in for a used EV that likely wouldn't cost you anything and would save you money?

For me, it was reverse engineered. I am not an expert or even conversant in decompiling Android APKs. It took the decompiled Java (app was apparently written in Kotlin) and extracted all the necessary information.

Call it what you will, the point is I do not have the necessary skills to accomplish this task, but I was able to go from an APK to a working implementation that was controlling the lights in my RV in a couple of hours back in early April using whatever was the current version of Opus at the time. While I understand what it did to accomplish this, it might as well be magic for me, because it would take me months of free time to get to where it got.

It also wrote out documentation of the protocol so subsequent work would not require reading decompiled Java code.

Using AI to reverse engineer undocumented Bluetooth protocols has been a godsend for me. We have an RV that came with a "Smart RV" system from BMPro that controls all of the lights, the air conditioning, starting the generator, leveling, slideouts, and other stuff.

The BMPro app is... well, it's like they actively worked to make it terrible.

I put up with it for 2 years and then had the bright idea to throw the APK at Claude Opus earlier this year. I now no longer have to use their terrible app as it reverse engineered the Bluetooth protocol and I can either use the custom-built Android app, website hosted on GitHub Pages, or the Home Assistant app I built using AI.

It's not perfect, and it has bugs, but it is less buggy than their app. I've been busy at work lately, so I haven't had a chance to resolve the bugs, but I'll get around to it.

I ended up also using Opus to patch the original APK to fix several bugs and inexplicably bad UI choices they made. I still prefer to use my own app, but I have the patched app as a fallback.

Orbital? Maybe not. Sub-orbital and ballistic? Absolutely.

The moment he talked about "remote pilots managing many planes," I closed the tab. Remote pilots sound great until something goes wrong, and things inevitably go wrong, not often, but they go wrong.

I will never fly on any aircraft that does not have a minimum two-person crew on the flight deck. The ability to "feel" the plane is invaluable in an emergency situation. Frankly, just the fact that someone whose life is literally on the line doing the walkaround is an invaluable part of the safety of commercial flight.

I was rooting for this company when I saw the news of their first flight. I am no longer rooting for them because it is obvious that their leadership does not understand the human element of commercial air travel.

> If I take a look, through a security lens, of the existing mail in process from registration to recording votes, it’s quite shocking.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

You supplied nothing to back up your extraordinary claims. Your claims are extraordinary given the almost non-existent issues with mail-in voting. But if you'd like to prove otherwise, be my guest.

I've only taken a London cab once. The bastard got lost!

I would say the Trump Administration needs to learn this as well.