Jeff Bezos's "Blue Origin" rockets are, in my opinion, something that could and should be an absolute banger of a space project. The idea that we could have some billionaire creating rockets for the express purpose of ferrying civilians into the black is something I actually think is needed.

Normalizing space travel, even if in the mind, is something we should definitely be promoting in the zeitgeist.

But then, as Bonchie wrote on Monday, Blue Origin created a PR stunt that was so stupid, I'm surprised no one stopped to think about the negatives for even a few minutes. //

Bezos's rich, leftist, elitist friends are probably not feeling him too deeply right now, and he needed to make it clear that he was still with the agenda by launching the "all-female crew" and making history for women. //

Putting on something so ridiculous as a clear PR stunt that ended up being so cringe-worthy and stupid that it's being widely and roundly mocked sets things back a bit in the minds of the public. Bezos could have put anyone in that rocket including scientists, astronomers, hell, even a regular family who never would have dreamed something like this could happen to them.

Instead, we get self-absorbed celebrities who just chose to use it as a platform to virtue signal, making this all worse. I can't see how this endears space travel to anyone. //

This gets even more infuriating when you look at SpaceX, which utilizes its ever-advancing rocket tech to actually move humanity forward in a way that moves us forward. The spectacle of SpaceX isn't in celebrities, it's getting the job done. It's making science fiction a reality. SpaceX literally rescues astronauts stranded in space.

It's a company that is advancing itself with the clear intent of advancing humanity.

Blue Origin feels like a vanity project meant to elevate one man.

This all-female crew wasn't even a crew. These women were just pawns dressed as explorers, form-fitting suits that accentuated their figures in all the right places.

Again, I want to make it clear that I'm not mad that this flight didn't contain any scientific research or exploration. Civilians going up and coming back down is actually a fantastic idea that I think could really get people excited about the prospect of seeing the stars just a little bit closer.

But this just felt like a stupid virtue signal meant to make one man look good to people who are, frankly, regressive in their views and contribute little to nothing to our society. To do all this with a technology that already is being eyed by a chunk of the public as wasteful and selfish is, in my opinion, irresponsible.

anon-bjec
2 hours ago

Let those peasants in the United States wail

This is how they see us, and why wouldn't they after the embarrassing displays the left has made in recent years. They own(ed) Xiden. Then Yellin made trips over there bowing and scraping submissively before even the lowest level party members. Lots of examples.

President Trump, they will find, is far different. //

SSN674 Donner’s Party
39 minutes ago
For the Chinese government to dump large amounts of U.S. Treasury bonds, they would likely have to sell those bonds in exchange for U.S. dollars, which they would then convert into Chinese yuan. However, this process increases the supply of dollars and raises demand for the yuan in the foreign exchange market, which puts upward pressure on the value of the yuan relative to the dollar. A stronger yuan makes Chinese exports more expensive and less competitive globally, which is the opposite of what China typically wants to achieve. To counteract this effect and maintain the competitiveness of its export-driven economy, China would have to take steps to devalue its own currency—such as loosening monetary policy or intervening directly in currency markets. So paradoxically, by trying to offload U.S. bonds, China risks hurting its own economy by pushing up the value of its currency unless it takes simultaneous measures to weaken it again.

Harvard University @Harvard
·
The university will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights. Neither Harvard nor any other private university can allow itself to be taken over by the federal government.
harvard.edu
Research Funding
1:07 PM · Apr 14, 2025 //

Team Trump was not amused:

"Harvard’s statement today reinforces the troubling entitlement mindset that is endemic in our nation's most prestigious universities and colleges – that federal investment does not come with the responsibility to uphold civil rights laws," the task force said. "The disruption of learning that has plagued campuses in recent years is unacceptable. The harassment of Jewish students is intolerable.

"It is time for elite universities to take the problem seriously and commit to meaningful change if they wish to continue receiving taxpayer support," the statement continued. "The Joint Task Force to combat anti-Semitism is announcing a freeze on $2.2 billion in multi-year grants and $60M in multi-year contract value to Harvard University." //

Hillsdale College @Hillsdale
·
There is another way:

Refuse taxpayer money. //

I've been reporting on similar stories in recent months, and one thing has struck me: the unbelievable amount of federal dollars that are poured annually into these institutions. Harvard has an endowment of—sit down for this—$52 billion. You wouldn’t think they’d need much help now, would you? Yet they’re the beneficiary of nearly $9 billion in multi-year federal grants and contracts. For DOGE's next trick, I would encourage them to find out where the heck that massive pile of money is going (not only at Harvard but at many other schools as well). //

Quiverfull
4 hours ago edited
Hillsdale, FTW. Literally the finest college in the country. Founded as an abolitionist school in 1844, never took a penny of government money, kids are wicked smart, most love the Lord, and they stand alone against government oppression. For instance, their stance on Covid (seems so long ago....) was epic and fearless.

I hate to do it, Bill, but I’ve got to correct you on every single thing that you said 'cause it was all wrong. First, we won the Supreme Court case clearly, 9-0. A district court judge said, unconscionably, that the president and his administration have to go into El Salvador and extradite one of their citizens, an El Salvadorian citizen - so that would be kidnapping - that we have to kidnap an El Salvadorian citizen against the will of his government and fly him back to America, which would be an unimaginable act and an invasion of El Salvador's sovereignty. So we appealed to the Supreme Court, and it said - clearly, no district court can compel the president to exercise his Article II foreign powers … In 2019, he was ordered deported. He has a final removal order from the United States. These are things that no one disputes. Where is he from? El Salvador. Where is he a resident and citizen of? El Salvador. Is he here illegally? Yes. Does he have a deportation order? Yes. A DOJ lawyer who has since been relieved of duty, a saboteur, a Democrat, put into a filing incorrectly that this was a mistaken removal. It was not. This was the right person sent to the right place.

The millionaires behind TLR support reforms that prevent you from suing them, but they’re all too eager to undermine reforms that stop them from suing you. Their efforts to gut the TCPA should be no less shocking than if PETA were caught selling fur coats.

The TCPA protects Texans across the ideological spectrum, from grassroots activists to government watchdogs to on-line reviewers. Weakening the TCPA would embolden litigious corporations, political operatives, and deep-pocketed individuals to use the courts as a cudgel against their opponents. The impact would be devastating not just for those sued, but for the fundamental principles of free speech and open debate in Texas.

It’s unfortunate that tort reform advocates now want to gut one of Texas’ most successful tort reform laws. Their disdain for expensive litigation disappears when they’re the ones filing the lawsuits. Texans should reject these disingenuous, self-serving attacks and tell their lawmakers to leave the TCPA alone, ensuring that all of us—whether pro-life advocates, journalists, or everyday citizens—can continue speaking truth to power without fear of retaliation. //

anon-ymous99
an hour ago
The reddest states have the bluest Republican legislatures. Never ceases to amaze me.

Leitmotif anon-ymous99
6 minutes ago
Actually, it's quite logical - in a perverse sense.

When Republicans dominate the political life of a given state, the grifters, hacks, and opportunists who would otherwise naturally gravitate to the Democrat party join (unfortunately!) the Republican party instead. This phenomenon, in fact, is one on main factors to consider when reflecting upon that salient question that has haunted so many of us - "Where DO, exactly, all these RINOs come from?"

In February, Georgia's heartbeat law, which restricts abortion after a discernable heartbeat is detected (around six weeks) except in the cases of rape, incest, or the life of the mother, was once again upheld by the Georgia Supreme Court in a 6-1 decision. //

But for a faction of life advocates known as "abortion abolitionists," so-called heartbeat bills do not stop abortions from happening. Their aim is to change this, making it illegal to have one. In March, State Rep. Emory Dunahoo (R-31) introduced House Bill 441 (HB 441), the "Georgia Prenatal Equal Protection Act," which would make abortion a criminal act. If made law, it would remove the six-week timeframe of the heartbeat law and the exceptions that go along with it.

HB 441 was crafted by the Foundation to Abolish Abortion (FAA), a non-profit, which, according to its X bio, seeks to "exalt and vindicate the image of God by promoting sound public policy that provides equal protection under the law to all preborn human beings."

Since the 2022 overturn of Roe v. Wade, there has been a concerted pushing of the envelope on fetal personhood. Like the Tyrannosaurus rex in Jurassic Park, who tested the electrified fence in order to find the weakness, abortion abolitionists like FAA are seeking to make fetal personhood not just a thing but established law; and the only way to do this is to keep challenging the legislative fences. //

FAA, as do most abortion abolitionist groups, rejects the premise of pro-life incrementalism in favor of immediatism. They also do not consider the established pro-life cause merely inept but wholly corrupt. They view these long-established organizations and veterans of the movement as part of the problem. In testimony in support of HB 441, this was expressed by Louisiana Pastor and abolitionist Brian Gunter.

The Supreme Court’s continuing failure to define lower courts’ authority is wreaking havoc on the reputation of the courts — and our constitutional order. //

The Supreme Court has interceded six times in less than three months to rein in federal judges who improperly exceeded their Article III authority and infringed on the Article II authority of President Donald Trump. Yet the high court continues to issue mealy-mouthed opinions which serve only to exacerbate the ongoing battle between the Executive and Judicial branches of government. And now there is a constitutional crisis primed to explode this week in a federal court in Maryland over the removal of an El Salvadoran — courtesy of the justices’ latest baby-splitting foray on Thursday. //

Yet, those requests, as the Trump Administration pointed out yesterday in its response brief, directly infringe on the president’s Article II authority. “The federal courts have no authority to direct the Executive Branch to conduct foreign relations in a particular way, or engage with a foreign sovereign in a given manner,” the Trump Administration wrote. Rather, “[t]hat is the ‘exclusive power of the President as the sole organ of the federal government in the field of international relations.’”

While the Supreme Court has declared that “[s]uch power is ‘conclusive and preclusive,’ and beyond the reach of the federal courts’ equitable authority,” given her orders to date, Judge Xinis is unlikely to stand down. Rather, expect the Obama appointee to enter another scathing order demanding details and actions. But with its core executive powers at stake, the Trump Administration cannot comply.

The justices should have foreseen this standoff and defused the situation last week by clearly defining the limits of the lower court’s authority. The Supreme Court’s continuing failure to do so is wreaking havoc on the reputation of the courts — and our constitutional order.

The New York Times continues to cover up government corruption, on April 11 hitting FBI Director Kash Patel for suspending analyst Brian Auten nearly a decade after Auten helped Democrats frame Donald Trump as a Russian asset. The NYT headline reads, “F.B.I. Suspends Employee on Patel’s So-Called Enemies List,” not something accurate such as “FBI Suspends Employee Who Illegally Abused Government Power To Protect Democrat Presidential Candidates.”

Wind power is killing a lot of eagles. The federal government is tracking this destruction, but it is all a big secret. We have a right to know what is happening to our eagles. //

By David Wojick
Published April 3, 2025
Imagine there is an industry product that is killing thousands a year and the number is growing. The government is tracking it closely, while keeping the data secret in order to protect the product. Outrageous, right? But that is exactly the case with wind power killing eagles.

Every wind-killed eagle found at an industrial wind site is quickly reported to the federal Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Every year each site also submits an annual kill report to FWS. None of this data is publicly available.

The FWS eagle kill data is all a big government secret designed to protect the wind industry from public outrage. This has to stop.

Power lines, though, are not a major source of eagle fatalities. The big "green energy" windmills are, though - or, at least, we think they are. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, whose job it is to keep this data, won't release the numbers.

https://heartland.org/opinion/the-feds-are-hiding-the-eagle-death-data/

Every wind-killed eagle found at an industrial wind site is quickly reported to the federal Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Every year each site also submits an annual kill report to FWS. None of this data is publicly available.

The FWS eagle kill data is all a big government secret designed to protect the wind industry from public outrage. This has to stop.

The public has a right to know about all these eagle kills. In addition, this data would support research on ways to reduce the killing. For example, it has been suggested that painting the blades black would help the eagles avoid the blades. In fact, there are a lot of technologies that could be studied given comprehensive kill data. //

The only possible reason I can think of is that the numbers of eagles and other birds killed by these contraptions is shockingly high, higher than any of us may have suspected. We should note as well that, were you to come across one of these dead eagles and pluck a feather from the carcass, you would be subject to criminal charges and a hefty fine - but the builders of these windmills are in no way held responsible for these eagle and other raptor deaths.

And where is the Audobon Society in all this?

Task: View / Display FreeBSD Routing Table

Use the netstat command with -r option as follows:

$ netstat -r
$ netstat -rn

How do I save routing information to a configuration file?

If you reboot FreeBSD box, the routing configuration will be lost i.e. the routing information will not persist. You need to edit /etc/rc.conf file to set defaultroute:

   # vi /etc/rc.conf

Set default route by editing defaultrouter variable:

 defaultrouter="192.168.1.254"

Girls are far better at navigating the outdated, factory-focused school systems that most public schools rely on. They can sit still for longer periods, listen more intently, and they even test better. If you're a school getting financial kickbacks for higher test scores, then boys are a complication. Moreover, if your school is being incentivized to have special programs for students with learning disabilities, as 36 states did, then getting ADD diagnosed kids was a lucrative venture.

I was a 10-year-old boy being treated like a defective girl. I was standing in the way of a public school making more money, and as such, I had to be drugged into something far more useful. It wasn't until years later that I understood that I was being used. They lied to my mother. Scared her into dosing her child with medications they told her would help me be "normal," despite having no idea what the long-term effects would be.

Does any of this sound familiar? It should. Before the jab, before "gender-affirming care," there was Vitamin R, one of the most egregious scams forced on the public, and particularly children, that was never fully addressed until decades later.

Unix introduced / as the directory separator sometime around 1970. I don't know why exactly this character was chosen; the ancestor system Multics used >, but the designers of Unix had already used > together with < for redirection in the shell (see Why is the root directory denoted by a / sign?).

MS-DOS 2.0 introduced \ as the directory separator in the early 1980s. The reason / was not used is that MS-DOS 1.0 (which did not support directories at all) was already using / to introduce command-line options. It probably took this usage of / from VMS (which had a more complicated syntax for directories). You can read a more detailed explanation of why that choice was made on Larry Osterman's blog. MS-DOS even briefly had an option to change the option character to - and the directory separator to /, but it didn't stick.

/ it is recognized by most programmer-level APIs (in all versions of DOS and Windows). So you can often, but not always get away with using / as a directory separator under Windows. A notable exception is that you can't use / as a separator after the \\? prefix which (even in Windows 7) is the only way to specify a path using Unicode or containing more than 260 characters.

Some user interface elements support / as a directory separator under Windows, but not all. Some programs just pass filenames through to the underlying API, so they support / and \ indifferently. In the command interpreter (in command.com or cmd), you can use / in many cases, but not always; this is partly dependent on the version of Windows (for example, cd /windows works in XP and 7 but did not in Windows 9x). The Explorer path entry box accepts / (at least from XP up; probably because it also accepts URLs). On the other hand, the standard file open dialog rejects slashes. //

The underlying Windows API can accept either the backslash or slash to separate directory and file components of a path, but the Microsoft convention is to use a backslash, and APIs that return paths put backslash in.

MS-DOS and derived systems use backslash \ for path separator and slash / for command parameters. Unix and a number of other systems used slash / for paths and backslash \ for escaping special characters. And to this day this discrepancy causes countless woes to people working on cross-compilers, cross-platform tools, things that have to take network paths or URLs as well as file paths, and other stuff that you'd never imagine to suffer from this.

Why? What are the origins of this difference? Who's to blame and what's their excuse?

Why does Windows use backslashes for paths and Unix forward slashes?
– phuclv Commented Aug 13, 2018 at 16:55

While your question is perfectly reasonable, your phrasing seems to imply that you think the UNIX approach was already a de facto standard and MS-DOS was unique in deviating from it. See, as a counter-example, how the Macintosh OS used : as its path separator until MacOS X introduced POSIX APIs. This question goes into the history of that decision and answers point to : and . as path separators predating UNIX's use of /.
– ssokolow Commented Aug 1, 2022 at 20:10

@ssokolow UNIX was there with its forward slashes long before MacOS and DOS were created.
– SF. CommentedAug 2, 2022 at 8:13

@SF. And, as the answer phuclv linked says, DOS got it from CP/M, which got it from VMS. I don't know why VMS chose \ when UNIX chose / seven years before VMS's first release (going by Wikipedia dates), but it wasn't a settled thing. Other designs were using : and . in the mid-60s, half a decade before UNIX decided on /, and UNIX broke from Multics's > because they wanted to use it for shell piping.
– ssokolow Commented Aug 3, 2022 at 5:31

Use of UNIX back then wasn't nearly as ubiquitous as it is today. Almost all of industry and many schools used manufacturer-written and -supplied operating systems, especially from DEC. And within the more well-known CS schools (not that it was called "CS" then) there was also a lot of use of homegrown OSes. So the influence of UNIX wasn't as pronounced as it is today, as well - that took many years to develop.
– davidbak Commented Aug 3, 2022 at 16:51

A:

PC/MS-DOS 1 used the slash (/) as the command line switch indicator (like DEC's RSX11 and DG's RTOS before), so when DOS 2.0 introduced subdirectories, they did need a new one. Backslash () came somewhat natural - at least on US keyboards.

With 2.0 IBM/Microsoft also tried to reverse that decision and introduce a syscall (INT 21h function 3700h and 3701h) and a CONFIG.SYS option (SWITCHAR=) to set a different switch indicator. All manufacturer supplied commands would obey that new char. Set to a hyphen (-) would make the syntax more like Unix.

In fact, in paths, the OS didn't care. All dedicated path names, like in syscalls, can be written with either slash. It's only within the command line scan of each command, that simple slashes get interpreted as switch indicators. The idea was that people could/should migrate to a Unix-like style, but that didn't catch on.

With DOS 3.0 the SWITCHAR= option got removed fom CONFIG.SYS, but the syscalls are still availabe up to today. //

A:

The README.txt file in the MS-DOS 2.0 source code, which was apparently intended to guide OEMs on how to build custom DOS builds for their hardware, indicates that the decision to use backslash was requested by IBM: Microsoft had been originally intending to use forward slash, and the change happened late in the development process. This is probably why the kernel ended up supporting the use of either character -- it was, presumably, too late to change over fully.

The user manual contains some significant errors. Most of these are due to last minute changes to achieve a greater degree of compatibility with IBM's implementation of MS-DOS (PC DOS). This includes the use of "\" instead of "/" as the path separator, and "/" instead of "-" as the switch character.

This is true, but very widely misinterpreted – the forward slash as an option character did not come from IBM, IBM's own operating systems (mainframe and minicomputer) never used that syntax. What IBM objected to, was Microsoft's proposal in DOS 2.0 to change it from slash to dash – IBM cared about backward compatibility. But IBM wouldn't have had a problem if Microsoft had made it dash all along, starting with DOS 1.0; IBM didn't care what the syntax was in the initial version, but they didn't want it changed in a subsequent.
– Simon Kissane Commented May 26, 2023 at 1:47

You see, it's not that these Aztec and Mayan cultures (and precursors) were being violent when they chopped up children on slabs of stone. They were just "connecting with the celestial bodies." Of course, even if one is morally vapid enough to accept that explanation, these indigenous Central American tribes were also incredibly violent in waging war and propagating slavery as a means of subjugation. The picture of them being peaceful peoples, just misguidingly sacrificing children to pagan gods because they didn't know any better, is ahistorical nonsense.

What you need to understand about that type of misrepresentation is that it is vital to upholding leftwing dogma on "colonization" and the supposed evils of capitalism. In that telling, these tribes would have flowered into a peaceful utopia without Western intervention. Further, they were morally superior to the Spanish invaders despite sacrificing children to false gods, perpetuating the most brutal form of slavery in history, and murdering each other with reckless abandon.

If the left loses that framing, their entire worldview, which centers on Western cultures being the only ones capable of evil, collapses. That's how you get a mainstream broadcast network seeking out an "expert" to claim child sacrifice was non-violent. Yeah, it's ridiculous, but it's also very purposeful. //

Betsy
3 hours ago
WEll, abortion is modern day child sacrifice, and the left celebrates it openly, so I guess nothing has changed.

Turtle Betsy
3 hours ago
I was thinking the exact same thing the entire time I was reading the article. Through modern technology we can actually see the size of the baby and it’s every feature in the womb and the left still perpetuates the idea that is is ok to murder a baby up until birth.

Not only do they kill children that would be viable outside of the womb, they actually sell their body parts. They are just as abhorrent as the barbarians that committed child sacrifice. Maybe more so.

The Café Cerés workers wanted things like more concrete scheduling, something that works against a business during lull times. But more than that you see examples of the attempt at enforcing leverage that does not exist. The staff organized with Unite Here Local 17, and the shop plied workers with the pitch to lobby for full-time hours, career paths, and to demand a say in the decision-making of the business. This saw the excitable staffers endure about six months of negotiations with no headway made, and culminating in the lowest of wages – $0.00 per zero hours.

While they pushed these union platforms beyond the usual, the front of house workers at Cerés were earning, with tips, roughly $25-30 hourly, and health insurance that covered 80 percent of their premiums. But this was unacceptable. //

Explain why you would propose a business plan to increase profits and the owner would instead opt to lock the doors. If these people are in fact the free market geniuses they position themselves to be, then how is it they have not undertaken the process of creating a business built on their proposals?

Put up the cash and run your own activist breakfast nook serving gourmet ingredients from socially accepted sources, and rake in the profits. But they know this is not a viable business model. We see this in the way their methods are attempted. They never invest in their own platform; rather, they impose it on those already successful. //

pat
22 minutes ago
Unions are no longer for the worker. Unions exist to pursue their own political agendas and keep the union officials in business. They promise good wages for workers but that is just a bribe for the union officials to keep their political objectives and grift going. They are in it for themselves not their membership. They are no longer needed, they are a hindrance to the well being of workers and the economy. Signed, former union rep who quit in disgust.

In accordance with certain free and open source software licenses, Amazon is pleased to make available to you for download an archive file of machine readable source code ("Source Code").

Once you know your kindle Serial Number, you can check data in the table below to see what Kindle or kindle generation you have according to the prefix of Kindle Serial Number.

Review distinguishing features to help determine which device you have.

Haven't used or updated your Kindle device for a while? Depending on your device and current software update version, you may have to install a previous software update before installing the latest version.