This is actually backwards. Texas Instruments made so many bomb chips that they ended up with a surplus. This allowed them to throw those chips into calculators and edge out any competition with lower prices (because they already made the chips, so they weren’t paying for them.) Then once they had run off all the competition, they jacked their prices up.

And that, kids, is why the TI-84 costs $100. It’s tech that costs all of $10 to make and program.

He was technically less popular at this same point in the 2016 election. He can absolutely still win if things go the same way that 2016 did. Liberals didn’t fucking vote in 2016, (for a variety of reasons), which handed the win to Trump.

He’s polling at about 45% (plus or minus about six points), but that 45% only counts the ~66% of people who actually vote. So it’s only 28-33% of the population that actively supports him enough to vote for him.

Gotta love when your company’s bus number is 0, because one dude in the basement is single-handedly holding the entire business together. The entire c-suite could get hit by a bus and the company could continue to function while new leadership was selected… But that one dude in the basement gets hit, and the entire company’s core function is crippled for weeks.

I still remember where I was when I saw that things had mathematically tipped past the point of no return for Hillary. It wasn’t a huge shock to me, but that’s mostly cuz I saw the writing on the wall when Hillary’s entire schtick for a while had been “no worries, we’ve got this, it’s not even a problem.” Democrat victories have historically hinged on whether or not they can motivate people to vote, and Hillary’s entire strategy did the exact opposite of that. Every single person independently went “she’s been saying for months that she already has it in the bag, so why bother voting?” And that led to her losing a lot of votes.

I can guarantee that private school kids do the exact same shit as public school kids. They just have more money, so they can get into more expensive shenanigans, and their parents are able to smooth it over with the cops/lawyers better afterwards.

It’ll likely be another “good people on both sides” type of endorsement. The type of thinly veiled support without outright stating that he supports them. Weasel words, so opponents can’t say he outright endorsed them. Because if they try, he can just go “that’s not what I meant” and dismiss it.

please look at those cases for issues with the prosecutors handling them. They are always because a grand jury failed to indict, not because of qualified immunity.

And this is how I know you have either fallen for the propaganda or you’re arguing in bad faith. A grand jury would indict a ham sandwich for murder if the prosecutor wanted them to do so. The prosecutor has full control over what evidence the grand jury does or does not see. And there is no defense attorney present to argue against indictment. The prosecutor can intentionally exclude exculpatory evidence, include hearsay (and other types of evidence that would be excluded from a trial,) etc… Lastly, the threshold for indictment is laughably low, because it’s basically just the jurors going “yeah it looks like there’s enough evidence to bother with a trial.

To be clear, the grand jury is just an arm of the prosecutor. The district attorney can decide to prosecute even without a grand jury indictment, but that isn’t always politically advantageous. Since district attorneys are typically elected officials, they need to worry about the optics of whether or not they charge someone, while also trying to maintain a positive working relationship with the courts and police.

Let’s say the public wants to see a trial after a cop kills someone. The DA doesn’t want to prosecute them, because the police union has vowed to stop cooperating with investigations if the cop is prosecuted. But the public wants to see a trial, and it’s an election year for the DA. They’ll fall back to the grand jury as an excuse. They’ll go to the grand jury and bring no evidence, (because again, they have full control over what evidence the jury is allowed to see).

When the grand jury fails to indict because they were given no evidence to indict with, the DA can then jump in front of the news cameras and go “oh woe is me, I tried SO hard to prosecute them but the mean and nasty grand jury refused to indict! My hands are tied! But I really did try to prosecute, so remember to vote for me!”

And the inverse is also true: Maybe a big case is in the news and the DA needs to look strong. Maybe a pretty white girl went missing and was found dead after a big public search. They can literally frame someone for the crime, and since the DA has full control over the evidence, the grand jury will happily indict them even if they’re clearly innocent. Maybe the DA has DNA evidence proving that the person wasn’t who rapemurdered the girl. But the DA doesn’t care if they’re actually innocent, because that’s what the trial is for; They just need a trial to look like they’re working on solving the case.

Is it oxidation? I thought it was a voltage control issue, where they randomly sent too much power to components and burned them out. And over time, those burnt out components and errors would compound and your CPU would essentially get Alzheimer’s.

Yup, I didn’t find my wife until we were both in our 30’s, but we’re both happier than ever. Finding the right person takes time and probably a lot of rejection.

Out of all the high school sweethearts who got married young, I only know one couple who is still together and doesn’t hate each other.

Yeah, therapists have noted a sharp upward trend of people dealing with politically driven grief. Basically, people separating from their family members due to political differences. And it’s almost universally from liberal people cutting off their Trump-crazed parents.

There is also the hilariously misguided belief that good coders do not produce bugs so there's no need for debugging.

Yeah, fuck this specifically. I’d rather have a good troubleshooter. I work in live events; I don’t care if an audio technician can run a concert and have it sounding wonderful under ideal conditions. I care if they can salvage a concert after the entire fucking rig stops working 5 minutes before the show starts. I judge techs almost solely on their ability to troubleshoot.

Anyone can run a system that is already built, but a truly good technician can identify where a problem is and work to fix it. I’ve seen too many “good” technicians freeze up and panic at the first sign of trouble, which really just tells me they’re not as good as they say. When you have a show starting in 10 minutes and you have no audio, you can’t waste time with panic.