If it still doesn’t work, the government will certainly allow immigrants to enter legally for those jobs.

In such a case, they'd be receptive to something like DACA, which was very surgically set to grant legal status to the "obviously useful" immigrants.

But no, the same administration that demands mass deportation will let industries burn to the ground before they ramp up legal immigration.

But you are right that the other side of the argument "but we need labor without protections to make stuff cheap!" doesn't sound particularly good.

Well, that and these policies shift every few years. So if you try to embrace the 'new normal' it stops being normal in short order anyway.

But in any event, it is a problem that the ostensibly "liberal" side ends of favoring making a labor class exempted from whatever rights and privileges have been granted to the legal labor class. It's also a problem that the deportation is cruel to the immigrants. Unfortunately, we don't have any policy in sight that is compassionate and empowering for those that do come to the country.

Deport every? No one to work the jobs most refuse to do… Means food, housing, and other shortages which makes prices go up.

This one kind of makes me a bit sad about the two prevailing sentiments:

• Heartless separation of families and forcing immigrants back into dangerous situations, frankly in the name of pursuing an ethnic purity/superiority.

• Maintain an illegal labor class of folks constantly under threat of deportation so they have fewer rights and higher fear to exercise the rights they do have, so they can be cheap and abused labor.

The "grant these people legal standing" seems to never be a persistent stance. Closest we got was DACA, and even that was pretty limited. No one dares threaten giving the cheap labor any leverage.

At least in some circles, it was ok that the customers were tapped out and not buying anymore, at least not at the same volumes.

A fair number of businesses figured out that the math works better if most people couldn't afford their product but at least some could at the higher prices. In one extreme example I recall a leaked presentation for a company that determined they could raise prices by 10 fold and still retain 10% of their customers, and that was a win because it's cheaper to deal with a smaller customer base in their case.

I know before the pandemic in my company, there was a long standing argument about whether it was better to be high volume low margin or high margin low volume. COVID forced the company to go with the high margin strategy and they decided the high margin people were right for a while. Then competitive pressures came in and proved the high volume people right, that someone in a competitive industry will make the high volume play and they will win if you don't also do high volume.

So if tariffs reduce the likelihood of one of the high-volume strategy companies participating, the remaining may gleefully go to high-margin and say forget about the masses, that's not where the money is.

not only did eating machine prices go up

I am an eating machine.

You've been downvoted, but I've seen a fair share of ZFS implementations confirm your assessment.

E.g. "Don't use ZFS if you care about performance, especially on SSD" is a fairly common refrain in response to anyone asking about how to get the best performance out of their solution.

Actually, the lower level may likely be less efficient, due to being oblivious about the nature of the data.

For example, a traditional RAID1 mirror on creation immediately starts a rebuild across all the potential data capacity of the storage, without a single byte of actual data written. So you spend an entire drive wipe making "don't care" bytes redundant.

Similarly, for snapshotting, it can only track dirty blocks. So you replace uninitialized data that means nothing with actual data, the snapshot layer is compelled to back up that unitiialized data, because it has no idea whether the blocks replaced were uninialized junk or real stuff.

There's some mechanisms in theory and in practice to convey a bit of context to the block layer, but broadly speaking by virtue of being a mostly oblivious block level, you have to resort to the most naive and often inefficient approaches.

That said, block capacity is cheap, and doing things at the block level can be done in a 'dumb' way, which may be easier for an implementation to get right, versus a more clever approach with a bigger surface for mistakes.

There are a fair number of "developers" that I think will be displaced.

There was a guy on my team from an offshoring site. He was utterly incompetent and never learned. He produced garbage code that didn't work. However he managed to stay in for about 4 years, and even then he left on his own terms. He managed to go 4 years and a grand total of 12 lines of code from him made it into any codebase.

Dealing with an LLM was awfully familiar. It reminded me of the constant frustration of management forcing me to try to work with him to make him productive. Excrpt the LLM was at least quick in producing output, and unable to go to management and blame everyone else for their shortcomings.

He's an extreme case, but in large development organizations, there's a fair number of mostly useless developers that I think LLM can rationalize away to a management team that otherwise thinks "more people is better and offshoring is good so they most be good developers".

Also, enhanced code completion where a blatantly obvious input is made less tedious to input.

Or it's going to prevent some of the problems...

Note that in US, to table something is to put it aside and stop considering it for now. The opposite of the UK meaning.

Yeah, but a tiny sliver of their valuation is attributable to the durable and real value of "AI" approaches.

Just two months ago, a security team member dinged one of our services for using Lets Encrypt, as "it's not as secure as a traditional CA".

I don't see why any level, even knowing "furry" would find these particular designs "objectionable" and worthy of rejecting. They aren't even vaguely fetishized.

There's some self selecting bias there, going to a 'furry convention' is a rather steeper level of engagement than just, say, looking at a webcomic featuring art like this mascot here.

Those more hard core sexual furries scare off casual furries as well as folks a bit timid about being associated with the most... Forthcoming portion of the fandom.

It's rough on some as they want to engage without sexual interest in the aesthetic, but as a result get grouped in with those with a sexual interest. They want to identify as something, and furry is closest, but they aren't into the sexual facet and struggle with that broad association.

See that American Gothic painting? Grant Wood must have had a thing for human incest, painting a father and daughter. Why would you ever paint/draw something you don't want to have sex with?

There's a lot of folks who find SFW "furry" content "neat", like this mascot art seems pretty innocuous. Only some of them are also interested in the kink.

I know someone who is into the general aesthetic of SFW "furry" stuff but is a bit weird about it because one of two things happens if she shares some content she likes:

• People turn away because they think she's into that stuff sexually
• People get way too into engaging with her because they think she's into that stuff sexually.

Feels like there needs to be some better nuance between "I like furry style SFW art" and "I'm all into furry in the the way people guess". Not that there's anything wrong with the latter, but it's certainly something you should have to explicitly opt into rather than an assumption based on liking or doing a drawing or like wearing an animal ear headband or non-plug tail or something similarly innocuous.

But the point, for this population and this meme, is that they have consistently voting in the same people and the results they have received are similarly consistent, and they keep voting that way.

Yes broadly there's been a "vote out the incumbent", but this illustrates why that's misguided, as it illustrates the different results of two states with consistent policies for each party.

So funny that Musk has specifically chickened out of a fight like that.

Further, hope that like usual when the Republicans get in charge, they stop being unified and infighting ensues.

Build a wall and make the Goron pay for it!