United has received its 1,000th mainline jet, claiming the title of the world’s largest mainline fleet. The aircraft ‒ a 737 MAX 9 with registration N77584 ‒ was delivered by Boeing on Monday.
With this latest delivery, the Chicago-based carrier not only has 1,000 aircraft in its mainline fleet but also has the most airplanes of any airline globally. Data from aviation analytics company Cirium shows that United took delivery of 57 total aircraft last year. //
The airline now trumps the mainline fleets of both Delta and American, which were the previous titleholders. According to planespotters.net data, Delta has 985 aircraft, while American has 978.
Look up the adjective biweekly in this dictionary and you will see it defined as "occurring every two weeks" AND as "occurring twice a week." Similarly, the adjective bimonthly is defined as "occurring every two months" AND as "occurring twice a month."
For this, we are sorry. But we don't mean "sorry" in the sense that we feel penitence; we are not to blame. We mean "sorry" in the sense that we feel a kind of sorrow aroused by circumstances beyond our control or power to repair. //
One such case, sort of, is very similar to the cases at hand: the language offers us biannual for "twice a year" and biennial for "every two years." This is useful and elegant, but, alas, also frequently botched, with biannual so frequently used to mean "every two years" that we've had to enter that meaning in our dictionaries. But here another solution is readily available: skip biannual altogether and use in its place the common semiannual.
Ah, semi-! Just as a semicircle cuts a circle in half, so too does the prefix semi- semantically cut what it is affixed to in half: semiweekly means unambiguously two times per week; semimonthly means two times per month; semiannual means two times per year.
As we've said many times here, the normal community understanding on contribution licensing is inbound=outbound, which is to say that contributors agree for their contributions to be licensed under the project's existing licence.
In the case of copyleft licences, as the linked question says, this is actually a requirement of the licence. In the case of the permissive licences like MIT, however, it's just a community understanding. Unless the project required a CLA from you, you could make an argument that you never licensed your contributions to the project at all, but I'd expect it to be a hard, uphill business to convince a judge of that (indeed, as Bart points out (thank you, Bart!), given GitHub's embedding of in=out in their TOS, it will likely be next to impossible).
But the project is completely entitled to change to a proprietary licence, and unless you can convince a judge that you never agreed to licence your contributions, you have no right to demand they stop using your contribution. One of the many advantages of copyleft licensing is that, once contributions have been accepted, the project can no longer unilaterally relicense. The permissive licences don't give the same protection, and this is generally understood, so what they've done, though not nice, is neither unlawful nor unethical.
One thing you can do is to take the copy of the MIT-licensed source you've found, and make sure it's available from your website (or at least, not solely from your github account). You have every right to do that, and as the search engines pick it up, you may hope that their proprietary-licensed version is supplanted by the free version.
On this site you will find all the German U-boats of both World Wars, their commanding officers and operations including all Allied ships attacked, technological information and much more. You can also browse our large photo gallery and thousands of U-boat books and movies. While hundreds of U-boats were lost some of the boats are preserved as museums today.
We also have a huge section covering the Allied forces and their struggle with the U-boat threat - not to mention the Pacific war. Included there are all the Allied Warships and thousands of Allied Commanding officers from all the major navies (US Navy, Royal Navy, ...) plus technical pages and information on the air forces.
Imagine if a woman lost her right to vote, protected by the 19th Amendment, simply because she crossed into a state with different historical views on sex roles. Or consider if a journalist’s First Amendment protections were recognized in one state but ignored in another. Such infringements are unthinkable — and rightly so.
Yet this is precisely the reality facing law-abiding gun owners who travel with concealed-carry permits. Their constitutional right to self-defense, which has been affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court, is undermined by a patchwork of state laws.
Like other rights enshrined in the Bill of Rights, the Second Amendment exists to protect individuals from government overreach. Allowing states to restrict concealed-carry permits undermines the universality of these protections.
In states with left-leaning legislatures, such as New York and Illinois, gun rights are subjected to restrictions that would never be tolerated if applied to other constitutional rights. This double standard is deliberate. Unlike other amendments, the Second Amendment has been politicized to the point it is often treated as a second-class right. //
National reciprocity streamlines these inconsistencies by requiring states to honor permits other states have issued, similar to how driver’s licenses are universally recognized. Importantly, this legislation would not force states to change their permitting standards. It would simply ensure that permits granted in one state are respected in another, preserving the rights of permit holders while respecting state sovereignty.
Concealed-carry permit holders are statistically among the most law-abiding groups in the country. They commit crimes at rates significantly lower than the general population, including police officers. Allowing them to carry across state lines would not lead to chaos or increased crime. Instead, it would affirm their right to protect themselves and their families wherever they go.
A Matter of Equality and Justice
At its core, national concealed-carry reciprocity is about equality under the law. The current system effectively creates a two-tiered structure of Second Amendment rights, where citizens in some states enjoy full protections while others are without. This disparity is fundamentally at odds with the principles of equality before the law enshrined in the Constitution.
Leftists argue that national reciprocity would infringe on states’ rights. However, states’ rights cannot justify violating individual constitutional freedoms. Just as states cannot override the First or 14th Amendments, they should not be allowed to undermine the Second. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and its protections must apply equally to all Americans.
Discover and continuously monitor every SSL/TLS certificate in your network for expiration and revocation to avoid PKI-related downtime and risk.
With the Electoral College votes now cast, here is a recap of how Americans voted in 2024. //
Trump won 77,284,118 votes, or 49.8 percent of the votes cast for president. That is the second highest vote total in U.S. history, trailing only the 81,284,666 votes that Joe Biden won in 2020. Trump won 3,059,799 more popular votes in 2024 than he won in 2020 and 14,299,293 more than he won in 2016. He now holds the record for the most cumulative popular votes won by any presidential candidate in U.S. history, surpassing Barack Obama. Running three times for the White House obviously helps.
Kamala Harris won 74,999,166 votes or 48.3 percent of the votes cast. That was 6,285,500 fewer popular votes than Biden won in 2020, but 774,847 more than Trump won in 2020.
More than 155 million Americans voted in 2024: 156,302,318 to be exact. That’s the second largest total voter turnout in U.S. history in absolute terms. It is also just the second time that more than 140 million people voted in a presidential election.
In relative terms, voter turnout nationally in 2024 was 63.9 percent. That is below the 66.6 percent voter turnout recorded in 2020, which was the highest voter turnout rate in a U.S. presidential election since 1900. Nonetheless, turnout in 2024 was still high by modern standards. The 1960 election between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon (63.8 percent) is the only other election in the last 112 years to exceed 63 percent voter turnout. If you are wondering, the election of 1876 holds the record for the highest percentage voter turnout: 82.6 percent. That was one of America’s most controversial and consequential elections—and not in a good way. It was also an election in which more than half the adult-age population was ineligible to vote.
Wisconsin holds the place of pride as the state with the highest voter turnout in 2024—76.93 percent of eligible voters in the Badger State voted. Five of the six battleground states that switched from Biden to Trump saw their turnout exceed the national average; only Arizona (63.6 percent) was below, and then just barely. Hawaii holds the distinction of being the state with the lowest voter turnout. Just 50 percent of Hawaiians voted.
A Landslide Election or Not?
Early election coverage described Trump’s victory as a landslide. But whether you go by the Electoral College vote or the popular vote, it was anything but. The 312 Electoral College votes that Trump won are just six more than Joe Biden won in 2020, twenty less than Barack Obama won in 2012, and fifty-three less than Obama won in 2008. Trump’s Electoral College performance pales in comparison to Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s landslide victory in 1936 (523 electoral votes), Lyndon Johnson’s in 1964 (486), Richard Nixon’s in 1972 (520), or Ronald Reagan’s in 1984 (525). In terms of the popular vote, more people voted for someone not named Trump for president than voted for Trump in 2024, and his margin of victory over Harris was 1.5 percentage points. That is the fifth smallest margin of victory in the thirty-two presidential races held since 1900. //
The 2024 election was the tenth presidential election in a row in which the margin of victory in the popular vote was in the single digits. That is a record. The longest prior streak began in 1876, when seven consecutive elections were decided by single digits. The last person to win the presidency by a double-digit margin was Ronald Reagan in 1984. He won by eighteen percentage points. The last time someone won the presidency by more than five percentage points was Barack Obama in 2008. He won by seven percentage points. The bottom line is that whatever one makes of the mandate that Trump did or did not win last month, the United States remains deeply divided politically.
Since the 2018 Janus v. AFSCME Supreme Court decision, which ruled it unconstitutional to force public sector employees to pay union dues or be coerced into union membership, labor statistics show that unions have stalled and continue to lose ground. The new age of employment and self-employment has opened up different avenues and forms for working Americans, ones that encourage freedom and flexibility. A January 25 news release from the Bureau of Labor Statistics delivered the sobering facts on how little draw union membership has for the American worker.
The union membership rate—the percent of wage and salary workers who were members of unions—was 9.9 percent in 2024, little changed from the prior year, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. The number of wage and salary workers belonging to unions, at 14.3 million, also showed little movement over the year. In 1983, the first year for which comparable data are available, the union membership rate was 20.1 percent and there were 17.7 million union members.
Across the country today, medical professionals are maiming and sterilizing a growing number of impressionable children under the radical and false claim that adults can change a child’s sex through a series of irreversible medical interventions. This dangerous trend will be a stain on our Nation’s history, and it must end.
Countless children soon regret that they have been mutilated and begin to grasp the horrifying tragedy that they will never be able to conceive children of their own or nurture their children through breastfeeding. Moreover, these vulnerable youths’ medical bills may rise throughout their lifetimes, as they are often trapped with lifelong medical complications, a losing war with their own bodies, and, tragically, sterilization.
Accordingly, it is the policy of the United States that it will not fund, sponsor, promote, assist, or support the so-called “transition” of a child from one sex to another, and it will rigorously enforce all laws that prohibit or limit these destructive and life-altering procedures. //
The order also targets the alleged science behind the treatments. It calls out the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) Standards of Care Version 8 as "junk science” (The Arguments Supporting 'Gender-Affirming Care' Have Never Been 'Based on the Science' – RedState) and directs all agencies to "rescind or amend all policies that rely on WPATH guidance."
As a kicker, the Department of Justice is directed to investigate deceptive practices or misinformation regarding the long-term effects of gender-affirming care, including potential fraud or violations of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. //
anon-o6eq
7 hours ago
Many countries in Europe have already taken this position after the Cass Report was released in England. Cass found that most of the science supporting child transitions was based on faulty data and an inappropriate relationship between WPATH and the organization doing their research to support their recommendations. Cass found that as many as 95% of kids who identify as trans as children will revert to their biological sex by the time they are adults if they are not treated with anything other than talk therapy. That is now the way most major European countires treat children who identity as trans - psychotherapy only until they are 18.
C. S. P. Schofield anon-o6eq
5 hours ago
This lines up with something my late mother was told in the 1950’s. She was being hired as a history teacher at a girls school (private) and her headmistress told her that many girls going through puberty would be uncomfortable with their bodies and blossoming sexuality. Some would develop same sex crushes, and some would experiment with masculine identity. The best course was to treat all this quietly as normal. Don’t make a fuss unless there’s a serious problem. The vast majority would get over the phase.
OrneryCoot
3 hours ago
There is something inherently wrong with the idea that the leader of the executive branch of government cannot fire persons under his authority, tasked with implementing his policy, in the executive branch. That is all kinds of "only in Washington" dumb. Trump is right to blast through that and try to tee up a SCOTUS decision. In the meantime, I will breathe a sigh of relief that these people are removed from their positions of power. Democrat appointed workers in the administrative state are open sores that need to be cut out. //
TexasVeteran
6 hours ago edited
Milley reminds me of General Thomas Conway, the backstabber who conspired with others to replace George Washington with Horatio "Granny" Gates. What a disaster that would have been. To get satisfaction, Washington encouraged his supporters to challenge the conspirators to duels! Talk about FAFO!
When challenged Gates cried, apologized and begged forgiveness. Conway fought a duel with Brigadier John Cadwalader, who shot Conway in the mouth. "I have stopped the damned rascal's lying tongue at any rate," he said afterwards. We could use a little Colonial justice today!
We need fewer Milleys and Conaways!🤦♂️. //
UpLateAgain
3 hours ago edited
- " the infamous incident where he called "Chinese counterpart on two occasions in the final months of Trump's first term, warning him the U.S. military had no plans to strike China in a bid to avert tensions between nuclear-armed countries."
It was even worse than that. Milley reportedly told the Chinese that he would be the one who determined whether or not nuclear weapons would be deployed...... and said this in a room full of major US Commanders.
THAT is tantamount to assuming overall command of US forces and constitutes a coup. i.e. treason... plain and simple. He may not be chargeable because of the pardon, but he should lose ALL his stars... and in fact, his commission. I don't know if they can take his retirement without a criminal conviction. Officers generally retire at their highest grade achieved. There may not be anything they can do about that. But commissions exist at the pleasure of the President. Trump should be able to revoke it. //
GreyBob Sarcastic Frog
5 hours ago
Nine ranks of enlisted soldiers: private (E-1) to sergeant major (E-9) five ranks of Warrant Officer, and nine ranks of officers Second Lieutenant (O-1) to General (O-9). Sometimes there is an extra general rank, but usually only in times of a really big war.
Busting this guy down to private would be fun, but not allowed under what he is being investigated for.
President Trump followed up his rampage through the National Labor Relations Board (Trump Goes Pearl Harbor on the National Labor Relations Board, Fires Chairman and General Counsel) by firing two Equal Employment Opportunity Commissioners and its general counsel. The newly reduced EEOC can no longer bring enforcement actions or initiate rulemaking as it doesn't have a quorum. //
Under Joe Biden, the EEOC bullied companies into submitting to DEI and replacing Equality with Equity.
Much like the defenestrated acting chairman at the NLRB, the two fired Democrats were not happy about the cruel turn of fate. //
Unlike the NLRB commissioner, whose firing seems questionable because the law says NLRB commissioners can only be fired for cause, the EEOC's enabling legislation does not require that.
The EEOC now only has two members and cannot act until President Trump nominates replacements. This is mostly a good thing.
I think there is something else going on with these firings. It seems like the Trump White House may be teeing up a challenge to a Supreme Court case.
In 2020, the CFPB was challenged for its blatantly unconstitutional structure. Under the law, it was managed by a single director who could only be removed "for cause." The Supreme Court agreed that allowing a single individual to control an agency outside the reach of the president to remove them was unconstitutional.
I believe the target of Trump's removal of three commissioners, one who can only be removed for cause and two without similar protections, is to convince the Supreme Court to overturn Humphrey's Executor vs. United States. This 1935 decision held that the president could only remove the commissioner of independent agencies for reasons established by Congress. The Selia decision established that did not apply to single commissioners; Trump wants to take a run at it to see if he can get that precedent overturned the way Chevron was reversed last summer; //
We'll see how this turns out, but even if Trump is wrong, the NLRB and EEOC will not be lumbering about the countryside and disturbing the livestock until the Supreme Court speaks. //
OrneryCoot
3 hours ago
There is something inherently wrong with the idea that the leader of the executive branch of government cannot fire persons under his authority, tasked with implementing his policy, in the executive branch. That is all kinds of "only in Washington" dumb. Trump is right to blast through that and try to tee up a SCOTUS decision. In the meantime, I will breathe a sigh of relief that these people are removed from their positions of power. Democrat appointed workers in the administrative state are open sores that need to be cut out.
Lisa Boothe 🇺🇸
@LisaMarieBoothe
·
Follow
This portrait, while gorgeous, says I have seen some things and am taking no crap these next four years.
FLOTUS Report
@MELANIAJTRUMP
BREAKING: First Lady Melania Trump’s official White House portrait
3:54 PM · Jan 27, 2025
What is also significant about each of the cases listed above is that the convictions in each case were affirmed by the federal Appeals Court — just like Joseph Fischer’s conviction was affirmed — before the convictions were reversed by the Supreme Court, and those reversals were unanimous in almost every case.
This unbroken line of decisions by the Supreme Court should have been warning enough to Biden DOJ prosecutors who decided to charge hundreds of January 6 protesters with a felony using a novel legal theory under a new statute.
Some involved in making that decision may now pay a price for having done with their jobs – and rightly so. //
Louis Rukeyser's Ghost
8 hours ago
So the previous Supreme Court rulings should have told the corrupt, political prosecutors not to do something corrupt and political? LOL. //
DaveM Louis Rukeyser's Ghost
8 hours ago edited
Don't let the Courts off the hook here. Every one of these decisions were binding on both the Appeals and Circuit Courts . And yet but one of them actually followed the precedents. //
Indylawyer DaveM
8 hours ago
Yeah, the lawyers probably looked at this case and noticed that they had a pretty good chance of winning until they got to the Supreme Court. And since that Court only takes a tiny percentage of the cases presented to it, they figured they had good odds. If the GOP had nominated someone who wanted to just put the whole J6 affair behind us, it probably would have worked. Plus it usually takes a few years for cases to get there, so they were likely successful in using this statute to force more jail time than most of the defendants would have served without it.
anon-n5wm
6 hours ago
A woman wearing a cross in a room full of atheists, God bless America. //
Tech in RL
4 hours ago
It’s not suprising she’s good at her job. She was Deputy Press Secretary to Kayleigh McEnany, after all. She studied with the master. Trump is the most transparent president in recent history and makes her job even easier. She doesn’t have to lie like the DEI hire did. //
anon-wy307
4 hours ago
Seila Law vs. CFPB (2020). The President is the sole individual in whom the executive authority is vested, and the authority of the President to fire personnel is absolute. Congress attempting to interfere or be consulted violates the separation of powers. The 30-day notice is unconstitutional.
That was the ruling.
There's good news for federal employees who were unhappy to learn they were expected to return to working in the office under the new Trump administration: They have another option — a buyout.
The White House will issue a memo Tuesday offering to pay federal workers who don't want to return to the office through Sept. 30, as long as they resign by Feb. 6, an administration official tells Axios. //
There's good news for federal employees who were unhappy to learn they were expected to return to working in the office under the new Trump administration: They have another option — a buyout.
The White House will issue a memo Tuesday offering to pay federal workers who don't want to return to the office through Sept. 30, as long as they resign by Feb. 6, an administration official tells Axios. //
We're five years past COVID and just 6 percent of federal employees work full-time in office. That is unacceptable," a senior administration official tells Axios.
- The White House expects 5% to 10% of federal employees to accept the offer, which would potentially mean hundreds of thousands of people.
- The administration projects the buyouts could ultimately save taxpayers up to $100 billion a year.
Zoom out: The offer applies to all full-time federal employees, except for military personnel, the Postal Service, and those working in immigration enforcement or national security. //
Further details of the offer — and the administration's approach — can be found at the Office of Personnel Management website under the heading "Fork in the Road": https://www.opm.gov/fork //
With a federal workforce of two million employees, if between 5 and 10 percent of them accept the offer, that means up to 200,000 may elect to leave federal employment. And, realistically, the ones who do are those most likely to not be in sync with the Trump administration's policies and aims, so...win-win, right?
Today’s ETOPS certifications allow US carriers to fly to Hawaii from the mainland United States using narrowbody aircraft. However, these planes must be specifically certified for the operation to be permitted. Unfortunately, a scheduling mistake from American Airlines once resulted in a non-ETOPS-certified Airbus A321 traveling to the Hawaiian Islands from the US West Coast. //
ETOPS stands for Extended-Range Twin-Engine Operations Performance Standards, though some in the industry humorously refer to it as 'engines turn or passengers swim.' Its foundation stretches back to when piston-powered aircraft were widespread in the commercial aviation market. These engines were unreliable, so traveling too far from a diversion airport could have serious and deadly consequences for those onboard.
In response, the Federal Aviation Administration created its 60-minute rule. This regulation stated that any aircraft with two or fewer engines could not fly more than one hour from a diversion airport. //
As a result of modernized airline fleets, the FAA adjusted its standards for long-distance, over-water flying. It started by issuing certifications for individual twinjet aircraft to fly long-haul flights that extended up to 120 minutes from the nearest diversion airport. This regulation became known as ETOPS 120. Among the first to receive these ratings were the Boeing 767-200ER and Airbus A300. //
services to Hawaii were still required to be operated by aircraft with an ETOPS 180 certification, which is slightly higher than the 120-minute rule established for other operations. //
In 1995, the new Boeing 777 became the first twinjet to receive ETOPS 180 certification. In 1999, a major change occurred when the Next Generation Boeing 737 family received an ETOPS 180 rating. The Airbus A320 family followed suit in 2004. //
American operated its Airbus A321 on several routes to the islands from the US West Coast. These A321s were a mixed fleet, as some had the ETOPS 180 certification, while others were not approved to cross vast distances without a nearby diversion airport.
According to ch-aviation, on August 31, 2015, American Airlines flight AA31 was mistakenly operated by a non-ETOPS-certified Airbus A321. The service departed Los Angeles International Airport and was bound for Daniel K. Inouye International Airport in Honolulu, Hawaii. The mistake reportedly occurred 12 days after the A321 was first deployed on the route.
An employee discovered that the aircraft involved, N137AA, was not ETOPS-certified while the aircraft was in flight. They notified American Airlines management, which then informed the FAA of the problem. Despite the mistake, the A321 touched down in Hawaii uneventfully but was ferried back to the mainland without passengers. //
There are minimal differences between a non-ETOPS-certified and ETOPS-certified A321, the latter simply having auxiliary fuel tanks to extend range in the event of a diversion. Additionally, extra medical equipment and fire suppression tools must be onboard and accessible to the crew.
$9.99
or 2 Pro Credits
Includes 1 print + interactive copy with lifetime access in our free apps. Each additional print is $9.99
Bill Melugin @BillMelugin_
·
NEW: Per sources, Border Patrol recorded just 582 illegal crossings at the southern border yesterday, with not a single one of the nine sectors hitting 200.
I’ve never seen anything this low in all of my border coverage. The numbers were already flat/low in Biden’s final week,… The numbers were already flat/low in Biden’s final week, bouncing between 1,200-1,400 illegal crossings daily, but the numbers have been falling off a cliff since Trump took office.
6:03 PM · Jan 27, 2025
Bill Melugin @BillMelugin_
·
Replying to @oldmandierkop
Got to a point where we wouldn't even get the camera out for a group of 500 it was so routine.
11:53 PM · Jan 27, 2025
The wailing and gnashing of teeth happening from the left, even that from people like the weeping Selena Gomez, is all performative. None of these people said a word when women and girls were sold into sex slavery by the criminal element flooding across the border. None of them spoke a word while the fentanyl coming across the border with drug smugglers killed a quarter of a million Americans. They were all silent as women were raped and murdered like Laken Riley, or little girls like Jocelyn Nungary.
But only now that these repatriations have started do they feel the emotional weight of the moment? When their loved ones are sick, do they smile at the infection and curse and scream at the doctor when he administers a treatment to stop it? Our people are literally suffering and dying, and now that we're making the odds of comfort and survivability greater, they're angry?
Who is the cruel one in the room again?
President Trump has fired the acting chairman and the general counsel of the National Labor Relations Board. This action reduces the five-member board to two members and prevents rulemaking and enforcement action until replacements are found.
The dismissal of General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo was expected. When Joe Biden was inaugurated, he demolished decades of tradition by immediately firing Trump-appointed General Counsel Peter Robb. So, #NewRules.
Abruzzo, who served as the NLRB's chief prosecutor, pushed an agenda that encouraged hyper-unionization. Her favorite theory was the "joint employer" rule, which would have, for example, made every McDonald's employee an employee of the parent corporation, not the franchisee, for labor law purposes. Fortunately, that rule was struck down by a federal court. //
Don't be shocked if, at some point, Trump relents and reappoints her. I think this action's purpose was to freeze the NLRB and prevent any of Biden's plans from going forward while giving him time to install his own chairman and majority. //
Once Independent
4 minutes ago
I would like to point out that the Supreme Court has time and time again stated that no LEGISLATIVE boundaries can prevent the President from carrying out EXECUTIVE actions.