Those aren't for the average H1B, in fact probably not for H1B's at all. Those are for top tier talent, possibly white americans to basically export their knowledge and kickstart their startups. "Hey, I have money and labor, come make your idea work."
This isn't for the guy they brought in to break your exchange server and fix it for money, or write a horribly bad OS for Microsoft. They'll take them too if they're indeed cheap, but it's unclear that the labor arbitrage situation will work out well for this.
understanding how successful models gain a survival advantage, while the weakest are more subject to predation is more than remotely helpful
You can learn game theory, you can learn economics (but hopefully you forget it promptly), you can learn about biology, play football or go on a jungle safari, the list is endless. You can learn about the advantages and, (dare I say it while living in the US) tremendous weaknesses of the competitive model without embracing the origin of your species as being something other than divine will.
But, I really question how much these abstract theories are valuable in most jobs that the average joe will get hired in to. A mechanic can fix my car without understanding that he shares a common ancestor with apes. An accountant can give me financial advice without questioning if Idiocracy is the inevitable result of civilized society, etc. A policeman can write me a ticket for speeding, without wondering if he has culled the herd too much and potentially ruined his otherwise sustainable prejudiced tax revenue system for the year. People going in to fairly exclusive and lofty educated professions generally do not have an issue with evolution (or understand it, and can apply it, but keep quiet about their religious doubts), this is purely a madness of the commoner, and one we don't necessarily need to confront him with and worry that he will be left behind.
In a system of Capitalism, anything is possible. Especially when the kindergartner has parents who themselves are rich enough to buy them a good private education or well educated enough to provide their children with one themselves.
Because computer science is different for citizens of Kansas than it is for Citizens of California? Because children in Wyoming won't ever need to code, but children in New York might? Even my grandfather had to leave Nebraska because the farm was going to his older brother(s) and he needed skills that would help him on his own in places where he could get a job.
I can understand pushing some things down to states if anyone who isn't corrupt is genuinely interested in the welfare of individual states, but education seems universal.
We have bred and continue to breed horses, domestic pets and a variety of food crops for thousands of years, both before the theory of evolution was condensed into science and afterwards, even by those who reject it.
There are a few fields where the theory of evolution is going to be a requirement, or at least a really good rationalization consistent with evolution but acceptable to your particular bogeyman. The majority can get away without it, and the more you try to force these people into your view, the more obstinate they will become. They are wrong, we all know it, we don't have to point it out all the time.
Now, we need a push so that kids the math, writing and science skills they'll need because the schools are failing horribly at those - especially science. What good is them learning to code when they still come out of school thinking Evolution is "just a theory" and not a fact?
In very few fields, even science and technology, is an accurate understanding of evolution even remotely helpful. If you wish to believe that a magic sky man crafted you from earth, for the most part, it won't get in your way (provided you keep this view to yourself, your peers will certainly ostracize you for it).
Or coming out of school without the basic math skills to succeed in a STEM field.
Or the majority of fields that one can get a job in these days, or even the ability to comprehend and call bullshit on leadership which wants to lie to you for profit. Math is the gateway to reason and objectivity the same way that reading is the gateway to learning.
And this focus on STEM is horribly musguided. Everything builds on one another. Music and art education is just as important and helps with other subjects. Why while everyone in my data structures class were struggling, I learned it instantaneously by making analogies to music.
Bad anecdote is bad. Many of us comprehend these subjects without struggle or making potentially dangerous analogies. Honestly data structures is the easiest part of computer science, if you're struggling there it's going to get much, much worse.
And also keep in mind that compared to the general population, more Noble winners play instruments. Interesting correlation between musicality and scientific creativity.
Statistics is the liberal arts of math. It contains truths, but you have to be more careful with what truths you glean from it. I imagine there are a lot of correlations with Nobel prize winners beyond just music. This doesn't justify a musical education as a basis for scientific knowledge.
But code.org is about creating a pool of low cost labor and not our economic future.
Yes. But then we do have a problem with a lot of people unable to get jobs (particularly people who got degrees in the arts), and if they are CAPABLE of doing the job, then why not provide the education to help them get there. If these jobs are high paying only because the information is hard to find or hidden away in caves by nerd-trolls to perpetuate job security, we can and should fix that. If these jobs are high paying because they are hard to do and not many people have the ability to do them, but the demand remains tremendous...then the salaries are justified.
And soon, computers won't need to be programmed, they'll be trained.
My college professor said this, insisted we were wasting our time learning to build or code things, we should be engaged in pure research. This was 20 years ago, he's still wrong. I imagine when I retire in less than 20 years, he will still be wrong. AI is nowhere near that capable now, nor will it magically inherit the complexity and improbability of turning corporate culture and brain damaged marketroids into code automatically.
There are some issue with the USB spec inrush definition that makes one want to tie fat traces between the power source and the USB port. There are ways of doing this properly, but almost no one wants to pay more than a fraction of a cent on it or become unprofitable/lose out to chinese suppliers, so shit happens.
recidivist
n 1: someone who is repeatedly arrested for criminal behavior
(especially for the same criminal behavior) 2: someone who lapses into previous undesirable patterns of
behavior
This is particularly true of SJW's, who have assumed the answer, mistakenly thought the world changed because they wanted it to (perhaps due to inaccurate Hollywood portrayals of America), and anyone engaged in this behavior is a throwback to a forgotten time. In reality, perhaps you are correct, we are not recidivists, we are obstructionists, but I'm fairly certain they believe the former.
SJW's scream racism and misogyny so quickly and so easily that they have enabled actual racists and actual misogynists. They shouted down anyone who either used a mildly crude expression, passed on a bad bill that somehow was tied to an SJW interest, failed to renounce some other figure who they deemed badpolitic. They rage against everything from blatant rape to some very shady/everyone-was-guilty date rape cases, to the point where heterosexual men became afraid that there but for the grace of God, they have not yet ended up in prison for women they had sex with. Even mildly insinuating that you have moral or religious issues with homosexuality gets you branded a homophobe and recidivist.
Meanwhile the mainstream person, who may not share their particular zealotry but has what the majority may consider a reasonable view on these topics, become increasingly distrustful of anyone yelling these words out. Now, the Orange Enemy, himself labelled as a misogynist for things I personally think were mostly gross exercises of poor judgement and bad character, but not necessarily misogyny, is appointing people, and those words are being yelled, and we're really not sure if they are truth or just more shrill voices from the lunatic fringe.
That's another example of post-truth, devaluing statements to the point where truth doesn't have meaning.
I want to point out that non-fat and gluten-free have legitimate reasons for existing. Perhaps you mean the Organic, Shade Grown, Free-Range, hand crafted version.
What drove that? Black racism and angry trailer parks.
Or put in a less insulting way, poor rural white men were promised the jobs they felt were taken away from them by... everyone else.
None of which were served by Hillary's campaign strategy. Blacks were taken for granted, trailer trash were called 'despicables'.
"Deplorables" is the word you are looking for. It's important, because only someone like Hillary Clinton would use that word. It conveys a strong sense of rich, out of touch elitist, describing... all other people. It just happens that this time she meant rural whites.
This is why she lost the election. Benghazi, email-gate, whatever... the republicans have been attacking her for so long, for so many reasons that most of us had tuned out.
Nazis were the ones using the popular media and personalities to silence and censor and were not the ones being silenced and censored
If you want to make rational discourse about the necessity of a eurocentric world view, go nuts. If you want to call people names, threaten their lives or otherwise taunt and torment them, you really ought to be censored if not jailed. No country will allow this including the US, it is not conducive to a smooth functioning civilization.
If you cannot refrain from mixing your rational discourse with your hate speech, then you still deserve to be censored. Keep it clean, and at least some people will allow your message to get out.
The bad news is Trump won, but I have been getting a lot of schadenfreude from the leftists' meltdown.
Here's to schadenfreude, by far my favorite picture. You can simultaneously see that she didn't consider even once that she could lose, that she was beat by a deplorable, and will never get to try again. The race was hers to lose, and she nailed it.
Supposing some evidence came out where the President Elect had done something way beyond the pale, like a video of him and a foreign leader conspiring to subvert American interests, would you rather the elector choose someone else, or have to vote for the President Elect who happened to be a traitor?
This sounds like a high crimes and misdemeanors. He would be subject to impeachment and subsequent removal from office if convicted. Sure, once he gets the launch codes he becomes dangerous, but there's nothing stopping Obama from going postal tomorrow except his general good humor. Three letter acronym groups do scan candidates and keep tabs on them, all of them.
The question then becomes whether the lower bar an electoral college would have to meet to override a candidate is valuable or just tampering with the will of the people. I would rather trust this kind of thing to the courts, we already saw the email bullshit at the last minute attempting to subvert a candidate based on a hypothetical.
It may sound like an extreme example, but if we just bind electors, what's the point of even having them?
As people? None. As points, they do help small (pop) states get a larger voice.
Could it be tweaked? Sure, I would like to see all the states' electoral votes be proportioned to the candidates by the popular vote within each state.
I think this would undermine the remaining purpose of the electoral system. In this fashion you will essentially have a popular vote, quantized in a funny way. Giving these small states 3 electoral votes and winner-take-all gives them more power than they would have had otherwise. It creates for some inversions, but because the states are low population, it's not so significant that an overwhelming majority is defeated by a powerful minority, it has always been near split.
But really it is there for a REASON. You are a citizen of your state first, and then a citizen of the United States.
Very few people identify this way in the modern age. I've been a citizen of over half a dozen states. I don't even consider it anymore, I move where the jobs are, wherever the jobs are. I am an American first. The one thing I've noticed about state & local governments is that they're the most corrupt, backwards institutions in America, highly subject to cliques and backroom dealing, mostly for sale to the local businessman. Honestly I think our Federation outlived its usefulness long ago. Most of the problems and bullshit fights we see are about state politicians losing some power for corruption and graft based on federal policies. Some states are better than others, but Texas is pretty shitty.
The states are the unit of power in the US. A citizen in Maine has vastly different needs often, than someone in Wyoming, than in Louisiana, than northern NY.
This we can agree on, it is the best reason for states to exist and to retain some autonomy at their level. Which is not to say that I agree that they should continue to function wholly outside of federal control and influence as they often do now, but there is a purpose to their existence.
I don't like that potentially voters in the Electoral College could vote how they want instead of how their state laws say
This is dangerous and scary but doesn't happen much. The original purpose was that this group of intelligentsia would decide that the rubes didn't know what they were doing, that they very blatantly WOULD go against the popular vote. In this case, almost certainly they wouldn't have chosen Trump... he is almost the definition of what the EC was designed to prevent. It seems inconceivable in this day that they'd go against the grain, I would feel better if it were the actual law that they had to (in all states), but I suspect there will be no change until the day it happens.
I mostly agree with points 1 & 2, but I think 1 undermines 3: 3. This may be the one chance in our lifetimes to see a non-government person go into Washington and upend all the corruption and bureaucracy. A business guy will be able to bring a real-world perspective to things government has been doing and look at lots of stuff and ask the unthinkable questions: "should government be doing THAT?" and "Is that the smartest and most-efficient way to do THAT?" and "Are you an actual expert, or were were you just the one who contributed the most money to some politician?"
He's going to have to clean career politicians, on both sides of the isle. He's going to be affecting their job and their income stream. I'm not sure I'd walk in to a meeting of mobsters and say "Ok youse, it's time to clean up your act and get on the right side of the law.", at least unless I was dying of terminal cancer already.
We may be about to witness what happens when a scab walks in to a closed shop.
Which one? I'm waiting for 4.0, the current one is looking a bit long in the tooth. Honestly this may be the only progress, that sticks, that we will see from Washington this side of the millennia.
When I give personal info to FB or Google or whoever I make the decision to do so, and I know what I've told them
The obvious answer that is so obvious that it is almost as if the telco's are deliberately ignoring it. If I could encrypt every possible element of my network traffic from them (I mean down to layer 2), I would. I want them to know NOTHING and I want them to be able to hand over to the government, NOTHING. Even if you use VPN services, they know you are doing that. Already overshare.
Facebook and Google I can lie to and mislead, it's my choice what to disclose and how.
The question is whether it's more important ot support companies that do business entirely in America, or to support someone's energy agenda and associated kickbacks. I'm fine if Tesla starts looking like a value compared to its competitors, but I have this funny feeling it's not going to go down that way.
Slashdot Mirror
$1 million signing bonuses are not cheap labor.
Those aren't for the average H1B, in fact probably not for H1B's at all. Those are for top tier talent, possibly white americans to basically export their knowledge and kickstart their startups. "Hey, I have money and labor, come make your idea work."
This isn't for the guy they brought in to break your exchange server and fix it for money, or write a horribly bad OS for Microsoft. They'll take them too if they're indeed cheap, but it's unclear that the labor arbitrage situation will work out well for this.
understanding how successful models gain a survival advantage, while the weakest are more subject to predation is more than remotely helpful
You can learn game theory, you can learn economics (but hopefully you forget it promptly), you can learn about biology, play football or go on a jungle safari, the list is endless. You can learn about the advantages and, (dare I say it while living in the US) tremendous weaknesses of the competitive model without embracing the origin of your species as being something other than divine will.
But, I really question how much these abstract theories are valuable in most jobs that the average joe will get hired in to. A mechanic can fix my car without understanding that he shares a common ancestor with apes. An accountant can give me financial advice without questioning if Idiocracy is the inevitable result of civilized society, etc. A policeman can write me a ticket for speeding, without wondering if he has culled the herd too much and potentially ruined his otherwise sustainable prejudiced tax revenue system for the year. People going in to fairly exclusive and lofty educated professions generally do not have an issue with evolution (or understand it, and can apply it, but keep quiet about their religious doubts), this is purely a madness of the commoner, and one we don't necessarily need to confront him with and worry that he will be left behind.
In a system of Capitalism, anything is possible. Especially when the kindergartner has parents who themselves are rich enough to buy them a good private education or well educated enough to provide their children with one themselves.
FTFY.
These sorts of programs should not be Federal.
Because computer science is different for citizens of Kansas than it is for Citizens of California? Because children in Wyoming won't ever need to code, but children in New York might? Even my grandfather had to leave Nebraska because the farm was going to his older brother(s) and he needed skills that would help him on his own in places where he could get a job.
I can understand pushing some things down to states if anyone who isn't corrupt is genuinely interested in the welfare of individual states, but education seems universal.
We have bred and continue to breed horses, domestic pets and a variety of food crops for thousands of years, both before the theory of evolution was condensed into science and afterwards, even by those who reject it.
There are a few fields where the theory of evolution is going to be a requirement, or at least a really good rationalization consistent with evolution but acceptable to your particular bogeyman. The majority can get away without it, and the more you try to force these people into your view, the more obstinate they will become. They are wrong, we all know it, we don't have to point it out all the time.
Now, we need a push so that kids the math, writing and science skills they'll need because the schools are failing horribly at those - especially science. What good is them learning to code when they still come out of school thinking Evolution is "just a theory" and not a fact?
In very few fields, even science and technology, is an accurate understanding of evolution even remotely helpful. If you wish to believe that a magic sky man crafted you from earth, for the most part, it won't get in your way (provided you keep this view to yourself, your peers will certainly ostracize you for it).
Or coming out of school without the basic math skills to succeed in a STEM field.
Or the majority of fields that one can get a job in these days, or even the ability to comprehend and call bullshit on leadership which wants to lie to you for profit. Math is the gateway to reason and objectivity the same way that reading is the gateway to learning.
And this focus on STEM is horribly musguided. Everything builds on one another. Music and art education is just as important and helps with other subjects. Why while everyone in my data structures class were struggling, I learned it instantaneously by making analogies to music.
Bad anecdote is bad. Many of us comprehend these subjects without struggle or making potentially dangerous analogies. Honestly data structures is the easiest part of computer science, if you're struggling there it's going to get much, much worse.
And also keep in mind that compared to the general population, more Noble winners play instruments. Interesting correlation between musicality and scientific creativity.
Statistics is the liberal arts of math. It contains truths, but you have to be more careful with what truths you glean from it. I imagine there are a lot of correlations with Nobel prize winners beyond just music. This doesn't justify a musical education as a basis for scientific knowledge.
But code.org is about creating a pool of low cost labor and not our economic future.
Yes. But then we do have a problem with a lot of people unable to get jobs (particularly people who got degrees in the arts), and if they are CAPABLE of doing the job, then why not provide the education to help them get there. If these jobs are high paying only because the information is hard to find or hidden away in caves by nerd-trolls to perpetuate job security, we can and should fix that. If these jobs are high paying because they are hard to do and not many people have the ability to do them, but the demand remains tremendous...then the salaries are justified.
And soon, computers won't need to be programmed, they'll be trained.
My college professor said this, insisted we were wasting our time learning to build or code things, we should be engaged in pure research. This was 20 years ago, he's still wrong. I imagine when I retire in less than 20 years, he will still be wrong. AI is nowhere near that capable now, nor will it magically inherit the complexity and improbability of turning corporate culture and brain damaged marketroids into code automatically.
There are some issue with the USB spec inrush definition that makes one want to tie fat traces between the power source and the USB port. There are ways of doing this properly, but almost no one wants to pay more than a fraction of a cent on it or become unprofitable/lose out to chinese suppliers, so shit happens.
No, I found it.
recidivist
n 1: someone who is repeatedly arrested for criminal behavior
(especially for the same criminal behavior)
2: someone who lapses into previous undesirable patterns of
behavior
This is particularly true of SJW's, who have assumed the answer, mistakenly thought the world changed because they wanted it to (perhaps due to inaccurate Hollywood portrayals of America), and anyone engaged in this behavior is a throwback to a forgotten time. In reality, perhaps you are correct, we are not recidivists, we are obstructionists, but I'm fairly certain they believe the former.
SJW's scream racism and misogyny so quickly and so easily that they have enabled actual racists and actual misogynists. They shouted down anyone who either used a mildly crude expression, passed on a bad bill that somehow was tied to an SJW interest, failed to renounce some other figure who they deemed badpolitic. They rage against everything from blatant rape to some very shady/everyone-was-guilty date rape cases, to the point where heterosexual men became afraid that there but for the grace of God, they have not yet ended up in prison for women they had sex with. Even mildly insinuating that you have moral or religious issues with homosexuality gets you branded a homophobe and recidivist.
Meanwhile the mainstream person, who may not share their particular zealotry but has what the majority may consider a reasonable view on these topics, become increasingly distrustful of anyone yelling these words out. Now, the Orange Enemy, himself labelled as a misogynist for things I personally think were mostly gross exercises of poor judgement and bad character, but not necessarily misogyny, is appointing people, and those words are being yelled, and we're really not sure if they are truth or just more shrill voices from the lunatic fringe.
That's another example of post-truth, devaluing statements to the point where truth doesn't have meaning.
Organic Non-fat Gluten-free Home-Grown
I want to point out that non-fat and gluten-free have legitimate reasons for existing. Perhaps you mean the Organic, Shade Grown, Free-Range, hand crafted version.
Their idea of "fake news" may also be somewhat broader than our own.
If you're asking the wrong questions about Windows, you're studying for a liberal arts degree.
What drove that? Black racism and angry trailer parks.
Or put in a less insulting way, poor rural white men were promised the jobs they felt were taken away from them by ... everyone else.
None of which were served by Hillary's campaign strategy. Blacks were taken for granted, trailer trash were called 'despicables'.
"Deplorables" is the word you are looking for. It's important, because only someone like Hillary Clinton would use that word. It conveys a strong sense of rich, out of touch elitist, describing ... all other people. It just happens that this time she meant rural whites.
This is why she lost the election. Benghazi, email-gate, whatever... the republicans have been attacking her for so long, for so many reasons that most of us had tuned out.
you can't refuse to make a cake because you disagree with what the customer wants written on it...
In some states. This particular example does seem to be a miscarriage of justice.
Nazis were the ones using the popular media and personalities to silence and censor and were not the ones being silenced and censored
If you want to make rational discourse about the necessity of a eurocentric world view, go nuts. If you want to call people names, threaten their lives or otherwise taunt and torment them, you really ought to be censored if not jailed. No country will allow this including the US, it is not conducive to a smooth functioning civilization.
If you cannot refrain from mixing your rational discourse with your hate speech, then you still deserve to be censored. Keep it clean, and at least some people will allow your message to get out.
That's the Vice President
For now. Soon, Obergruppenfuhrer Pence.
ied down with restraints in a prone position, packed spoon fashion!
This sounds like a few cubicle layout proposals I've seen lately.
The bad news is Trump won, but I have been getting a lot of schadenfreude from the leftists' meltdown.
Here's to schadenfreude, by far my favorite picture. You can simultaneously see that she didn't consider even once that she could lose, that she was beat by a deplorable, and will never get to try again. The race was hers to lose, and she nailed it.
Trump will make sure future MacBook Pros will be Made in America. We can all get jobs assembling MacBook Pros and America will be great again!
If he could do this, I might take back everything bad I've said about him. But this would require some actual plan and skill.
Supposing some evidence came out where the President Elect had done something way beyond the pale, like a video of him and a foreign leader conspiring to subvert American interests, would you rather the elector choose someone else, or have to vote for the President Elect who happened to be a traitor?
This sounds like a high crimes and misdemeanors. He would be subject to impeachment and subsequent removal from office if convicted. Sure, once he gets the launch codes he becomes dangerous, but there's nothing stopping Obama from going postal tomorrow except his general good humor. Three letter acronym groups do scan candidates and keep tabs on them, all of them.
The question then becomes whether the lower bar an electoral college would have to meet to override a candidate is valuable or just tampering with the will of the people. I would rather trust this kind of thing to the courts, we already saw the email bullshit at the last minute attempting to subvert a candidate based on a hypothetical.
It may sound like an extreme example, but if we just bind electors, what's the point of even having them?
As people? None. As points, they do help small (pop) states get a larger voice.
Could it be tweaked? Sure, I would like to see all the states' electoral votes be proportioned to the candidates by the popular vote within each state.
I think this would undermine the remaining purpose of the electoral system. In this fashion you will essentially have a popular vote, quantized in a funny way. Giving these small states 3 electoral votes and winner-take-all gives them more power than they would have had otherwise. It creates for some inversions, but because the states are low population, it's not so significant that an overwhelming majority is defeated by a powerful minority, it has always been near split.
But really it is there for a REASON. You are a citizen of your state first, and then a citizen of the United States.
Very few people identify this way in the modern age. I've been a citizen of over half a dozen states. I don't even consider it anymore, I move where the jobs are, wherever the jobs are. I am an American first. The one thing I've noticed about state & local governments is that they're the most corrupt, backwards institutions in America, highly subject to cliques and backroom dealing, mostly for sale to the local businessman. Honestly I think our Federation outlived its usefulness long ago. Most of the problems and bullshit fights we see are about state politicians losing some power for corruption and graft based on federal policies. Some states are better than others, but Texas is pretty shitty.
The states are the unit of power in the US. A citizen in Maine has vastly different needs often, than someone in Wyoming, than in Louisiana, than northern NY.
This we can agree on, it is the best reason for states to exist and to retain some autonomy at their level. Which is not to say that I agree that they should continue to function wholly outside of federal control and influence as they often do now, but there is a purpose to their existence.
I don't like that potentially voters in the Electoral College could vote how they want instead of how their state laws say
This is dangerous and scary but doesn't happen much. The original purpose was that this group of intelligentsia would decide that the rubes didn't know what they were doing, that they very blatantly WOULD go against the popular vote. In this case, almost certainly they wouldn't have chosen Trump... he is almost the definition of what the EC was designed to prevent. It seems inconceivable in this day that they'd go against the grain, I would feel better if it were the actual law that they had to (in all states), but I suspect there will be no change until the day it happens.
I mostly agree with points 1 & 2, but I think 1 undermines 3:
3. This may be the one chance in our lifetimes to see a non-government person go into Washington and upend all the corruption and bureaucracy. A business guy will be able to bring a real-world perspective to things government has been doing and look at lots of stuff and ask the unthinkable questions: "should government be doing THAT?" and "Is that the smartest and most-efficient way to do THAT?" and "Are you an actual expert, or were were you just the one who contributed the most money to some politician?"
He's going to have to clean career politicians, on both sides of the isle. He's going to be affecting their job and their income stream. I'm not sure I'd walk in to a meeting of mobsters and say "Ok youse, it's time to clean up your act and get on the right side of the law.", at least unless I was dying of terminal cancer already.
We may be about to witness what happens when a scab walks in to a closed shop.
e probably only wants to show off his wife
Which one? I'm waiting for 4.0, the current one is looking a bit long in the tooth. Honestly this may be the only progress, that sticks, that we will see from Washington this side of the millennia.
When I give personal info to FB or Google or whoever I make the decision to do so, and I know what I've told them
The obvious answer that is so obvious that it is almost as if the telco's are deliberately ignoring it. If I could encrypt every possible element of my network traffic from them (I mean down to layer 2), I would. I want them to know NOTHING and I want them to be able to hand over to the government, NOTHING. Even if you use VPN services, they know you are doing that. Already overshare.
Facebook and Google I can lie to and mislead, it's my choice what to disclose and how.
The question is whether it's more important ot support companies that do business entirely in America, or to support someone's energy agenda and associated kickbacks. I'm fine if Tesla starts looking like a value compared to its competitors, but I have this funny feeling it's not going to go down that way.