Considering that driving (at least in the US) is a relatively unsafe means of travel compared to the alternatives, I can understand imploring someone to drive safe.
They also use this camera system when creating implants. After the implant post was installed, they scan your mouth to determine the optimum shape for your crown (that goes on the post).
Even with just regular crowns. I've had a few root canals as I've gotten older. They scanned the old tooth, brought into 3d modelling software, modified it for purpose, checked it's resulting fit against neighboring teeth, and then sent it to a mill right in the office and had it glued into my head in less than a hour.
My doctor knows I'm into this so he always does it right next to me and turns the PC monitor so I can watch the entire process. The software is so simple almost anyone could use it. Generating a medically correct result is obviously where all the skill lies.
The Zumwalt class are being refitted to carry CSP. And the boutique gun system is really a complex thing, it's not like packing in a bunch of VLS containers.
Schneier was simply taking at face value the contents of the Bloomberg article, especially the statement by Mike Quinn who claimed he was told by the Air Force not to include any Supermicro gear in a bid.
How many H1B visa holders become citizens eligible to vote for those "left leaning politicians?"
I don't think having an H1B helps you accelerate your citizenship application in anyway, and for many countries the wait for legal citizenship is decades long.
You didn't answer the question at all. Getting an H1B visa is merely the first step in a very long process towards citizenship. Decades long. For example, if you're from India and you get an H1B, it'll be roughly a decade before you can get a green card. From then you have a mandatory 5 year waiting period before naturalization. And this assumes a normal, functioning immigration process; something we definitely don't have in the US.
This can be sped up if they marry a US citizen, speeding up the process quite a bit, but it will still be several years. Now their children would be citizens, but that's another 18 years before they can vote. Politicians aren't known for playing the long game...
>Politicians aren't known for playing the long game
There are plenty of politicians who have played the long game, also political parties take actions on longer time scales than individual politicians. Stances that politicians take on issues often come down from the party anyway. Many politicians don't care about many issues, but they vote based on their party's stance. The blue party is staffed with all types of people, many of whom will live to reap the benefits of changed demographics.
Heck many politicians are still in office 18 years later! Look at Nancy Pelosi, she was in office for 38 years. That's multiple batches of anchor babies.
It's not that long of an investment. We have seen this entire country go from 99% white in most places to below 50% in most places, in ONE generation and that change is clearly visible in national elections.
I mean just look at the data, it's a story that tells itself. One party does indeed benefit from increasing diversity and they are also the party that coincidentally spends a lot of time working on initiatives to increase diversity.
It seems that you are using the term "Great Replacement" as a tactic to dismiss the argument and all the data by which it is supported because you have no real counter argument.
I also did say that the other side benefits from importing cheap labor. Which is why both parties seem to do very little to slow immigration no matter which is in power, despite overwhelming demand from their constituents to slow immigration.
This doesn't make any sense to me. There are and have been numerous authoritarian regimes that lack "high public support", now and in the past. The entire idea for most authoritarian regimes is to slowly minimize the power of those who oppose them. And then, they spend a huge amount of resources looking for dissent (SD/Gestapo, Stasi, etc.) and trying to control the societal narrative.
Any government that lacks public support collapses.
Democratic governments can operate without a plurality of support for the current government, because the population generally supports and is invested in the system of government. When democratic governments fail, there is usually very little danger of violence or economic and societal instability, because there is trust in those systems. Corruption and malfeasance harms trust in the systems of governance which democracies depend upon.
Authoritarian governments depend on confidence in the government to continue functioning. The system of government isn't necessarily trusted, the workers of government aren't necessarily trusted, but the leaders are in charge and doing things. Media manipulation and effective propaganda is certainly an important tool for these governments, but pointing out that it exists doesn't mean that it doesn't work! Propaganda totally does work, by almost all measures. Russia, China, Cuba, Iran all have high domestic support for the government.
Authoritarian governments also tend to be very stable - people know what to expect. Democracies change periodically. The stability and familiarity are key to the trust that authoritarian governments maintain. The protests in Iran prior to the current conflict are a good example of what happens when a government fails to maintain the trust of the people - the arrival of war saved the current regime from falling apart at the seams when Khomeini died of cancer in a few months and a squabble for the leadership broke out amid a collapsing economy.
I think that you're underestimating the power of authoritarianism. For Iran, I don't think the government was in any danger prior to the war. It was capable of exerting control through the state apparatus quite easily. And look at North Korea, you think that the people under that government are supportive? That's nonsense on stilts.
Also, that collapse you refer to can take an awful long time under authoritarian control.
I feel like this discussion is more about westerners who don't understand the actual effects of political repression. A reminder, Nicolae Ceaușescu had a 90+% approval rating just a week before he was put on trial and deleted in less than a day. Measuring approval ratings in authoritarian regimes is an almost impossible task if you care at all about accuracy.
Flying military aircraft is inherently dangerous. The US Army had 15 Class A mishaps in 2025, the USN 12, the USAF 14, and 6 for the USMC. The Apache (AH-64) led the Army, and this is a mature airframe, but shit happens.
reply