Thursday... you know, yesterday....  was an EPIC day of winning.

The aforementioned James indictment being tossed was a follow through bitchslap.  The orange dust in the air hasn't settled yet.

Trumpy's power grab in Indiana failed hilariously spectacular.  Even funnier is when he tried to play it off like it was no big deal and he wasn't very involved with it.    Except by whining, begging, and threatening the GOP members that they better vote his way.  But they said "no".  And then sided with the Dem minority. 

House Republicans voted to approved a bipartisan measure to restore collective bargaining rights for nearly one million federal workers, effectively nullifying a prior Trump executive order.

And - to the surprise of no one - he failed again to share any details or offer any insight to his "concept of a plan" for the upcoming healthcare issue.

Prepare for a long weekend of social media screeching and lying.

You must be binge watching Rachel Maddow.   

Regulating costs in the medical industry is the solution. Corruption between medical industry and politicians needs to be investigated.

Both sides are dirty if not filthy from both the medical industry, military industrial complex and especially Israel.  I believe in Americans first and not one penny should be cut from any one social program or otherwise that benefits any one American before taking the scalpel to the aforementioned entities. 

Funk is right.  You are starting to come around.  I'll never give up on you!

They hate AI because it scales past them. 

A lot of programmers seem to despise AI, especially when non-programmers use it effectively. I’ve written several genuinely useful scripts with AI, shared them on a forum, and instead of a simple “thanks,” the response was outrage — suddenly it was all about copyright, end-user agreements, and technicalities. What gets ignored is that it still took real work: trial and error, testing, iteration, and almost a full day to get the scripts working correctly. The hostility isn’t really about legality — it’s about feeling threatened. AI lowers the barrier, and some people don’t like the idea that skills they guarded for years are becoming more accessible.

I think half of programmers feel threatened and the other half are excited.  I saw a recent interview with a well known programmer who's been programming for fifty years.  He said he's never had more fun programming.  I completely agree with his sentiment.  I'm a B+ programmer and haven't programmed in many years. 

Recently, I've been vibe coding with AI using Windsurf and Cursor.  One of the programs was a simple to do list using the Svelte framework and Vite on the front end and changing the language, framework and database on the back end.  With all the programs using the same front end. 

Six total programs:
1 Ruby language, Sinatra framework, and SQLite database
2 Node.js runtime environment, JavaScript language, Express framework, and SQLite database
3 Deno runtime environment, JavaScript language, Oak framework, SQLite database
4 Deno runtime environment, Oak framework, and MongoDB database
5 Deno runtime environment, Oak framework, and PostgreSQL database
6 Elixir language, Phoenix framework, and PostgreSQL database

At the end of all that I felt like I could program any kind of webpage using any language and framework.  I've done three other programs with AI using Python, Java, and Go.

I completely agree that AI lowers the barrier, but I think that barrier was lowered even before AI.

On the front end you have JavaScript and half a dozen frame works.   You can even use JavaScript for the back end with Node JS.  In addition to back end frameworks.  As a result the barrier was already very low to begin with and that's part of the problem.  There are just too many web developers to begin with and it's too easy to do.  AI just compounds a problem that already existed and people don't want to admit.

I don’t think that theory holds up. Venezuela isn’t some easy pressure point the U.S. can just “use” in a geopolitical chess match. The country is larger than Vietnam, extremely difficult to occupy, and perfectly suited for long-term guerrilla warfare. Any attempt to strong-arm it would turn into a massive drain with no real upside.

The U.S. already struggled to control far smaller and less resilient regions — Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan — and Venezuela would be even harder. Regional neighbors like Colombia would quietly support resistance, and anti-U.S. sentiment across Latin America would explode.

And beyond that, the American public has no appetite for another foreign conflict. We’re nearly $39 trillion in debt, people distrust the government more than ever, and nobody is willing to die in a war with Venezuela over some geopolitical flex.

If Trump is trying to use Venezuela as a bargaining chip against Russia, it’s a reckless and unrealistic strategy that would almost certainly devolve into a quagmire.

And while a U.S. attack could actually boost Maduro’s standing at home by rallying nationalist sentiment against foreign intervention, I’ll admit that this dynamic isn’t universal. Saddam didn’t gain popularity when the U.S. invaded Iraq. But the context is completely different: Iraq had been devastated by sanctions and previous wars, and many Iraqis already viewed Saddam as illegitimate. Venezuela, on the other hand, has a long history of resisting U.S. influence, and foreign aggression tends to unify Latin American populations — even those who dislike their leaders.

We'll have to wait and see what happens, but there's a good chance your post won't age well.