The money saved will pay for one dev, or two if you cheap out

I don’t have kids so I dunno if it’s still happening, but my dad had a brief and very awkward conversation with me to tell me that if I had sex to make sure to use a condom but if I ever did get a girl pregnant I could always tell him and it’d be OK, we’d figure it out, etc. Nothing fancy or anything; just the essentials to make sure I wasn’t a dumbass about sex.

Honestly, nowadays a part of the “birds and bees” talk should include an explanation of privacy settings and common Internet scams.

Absolutely not; I wish all kids argued their case using well-thought-out presentations

In principle I agree. The problem is that there are countries which don’t care about respecting law and if you kill AI in the West, all that will happen is the West will get left behind.

Yep this is “Trump’s Great Leap Forward” and we should start referring to it as such.

And he always proudly points out that he himself has never been personally bankrupt. Somehow, the fact that he always manages to bankrupt his investors instead of himself was seen as a good reason why America should become his next big investor.

Page 21 of the ruling:

First, the Enforcement Guidance contravenes Title VII’s plain text by expanding the scope of “sex” beyond the biological binary: male and female. Although Title VII defines “sex” to also include “pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions,” §2000e(k), the Enforcement Guidance concludes that “sex” under Title VII "includes ‘pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions’ and sexual orientation and gender identity." Enforcement Guidance, §I(A)(5) (emphasis added). Notably, the Guidance uses quotation marks around “pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions”—but not “sexual orientation” or “gender identity.” Because neither the plain text of Title VII nor Supreme Court precedent defines Title VII “sex” this broadly. Thus, the Enforcement Guidance lacks statutory or jurisprudential authority to expand Title VII’s definition of “sex” to include these new categories.

Interestingly, this also seems to provide a legal basis to discriminate against straight people and cis people. It’ll be interesting to see how Republicans attempt to close that extra loophole without also closing the loophole for discrimination against LGBTQ people.