laxtonto

The NCAA lawsuits worked because it was a blanket restriction on their market. Conference restrictions will become much more complicated, as the conference individually are allowed to be more restrictive than the NCAA. So even if the NCAA is forced by the courts to allow a blanket set of exclusion, you are still stuck with the conference rules.

Only 2 in the new millennium, 2 more post 1980.

I got to admit, it would the cool to see that redone post 1980 or 2000+

Reese reminds me a bit of mid-career Rodman that would dominate on the glass and on D but still have extremely frustrating stretches on missing bunnies...

Taiwan will never fall because the rest of the world (including many high end things in China) needs them to stay operational.

20 years from now, if this pattern continues, Taiwan would be vulnerable due to the erosion of their chip fad monopoly, but by then China will have its own problems as well..:

As overrated as Manning was at the beginning of last season as a first-year starter, I am starting to think he is being underrated now by people just wanting to hate on Texas or the Mannings in general.

We make fun of him being a "generational" recruit and Texas losing 3 games last year as his first year as a starter as an easy point to poke Longhorn fans, but for some reason we forget that Texas was tied for 21st in the nation in drops, their LG position had a 25% whiff rate for the season (how was that even possible!?!), PFF had them 125th in the nation in pass protection efficiency, were in the bottom of the conference in rushing yards before contact and related advanced metrics and Manning was pressured on 35.6% of his dropbacks. That is just unfathomably bad, looking back at their OL performance.

And yet through all of this, Manning improved throughout the season, and it was obvious he wasn't what was holding Texas back by the end of the season. If I were told those were going to be Texas' stats before last season, I would not have believed you when you told me they only lost 3 games.

His talent isn't going to define his performance this season beyond what what he showed at the end of last year. If Texas can actually block anything in the passing game or in the running game, it will define Manning's season.

What I find the most interesting is that, in the long run, his pleading the Fifth is probably going to force a constitutional question regarding both the viability of blanket pardons and whether you can plead the Fifth on content covered under a blanket pardon, and how the argument of when a witness has a reasonable fear that the answer could lead to criminal prosecution.

Since he accepted the pardon, he is free and clear of "any federal offenses (“offenses against the United States”) he may have committed or taken part in between January 1, 2014 to January 19, 2025 that arose from or related in any manner to his service as Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), as a member of the White House Coronavirus Task Force or White House COVID-19 Response Team, or as Chief Medical Advisor to the President.

So the question is, what is he pleading the Fifth to avoid incriminating himself for? His prior testimonies all fall under the pardon window (now you can argue that his mistruths were not done under the guise of his official capacity but for his own benefit outside the scope of the pardon, but that a hard thing to prove legally), so is he attempting to shield himself from future potential perjury charges, ie he has intent to lie to congress but pleading the 5th is a better option as it places the blame on his legal council?

Leavitt is a hard one to judge because of his Lisfranc injury/surgery, and what does that do to his mobility and play style?

Combine that with a very solid supporting cast, a consistent OL at ASU, and weak B12, and it is justified to have questions.

I don't think he is in my top 5, but there is enough to have concerns if you look at him as a "glass half empty" scenario.

Students can experiment with Kubernetes and all sorts of other fun toys but as undergraduates outside of true Computer Science or Data Science programs they are unlikely to use them regularly in most STEM fields. Meanwhile the number of common PC-only STEM software packages at the university level is staggering. If you want to go into programming go for it and in truth you will probably need multiple machines for the variety of tools and architectures involved but a Mac has a significant disadvantage as a sole platform in the vast majority of STEM fields. That should not even be a point of contention.

Having a Mac in STEM means you will not be able to natively run SOLIDWORKS, Autodesk Inventor, Autodesk Revit, PTC Creo, Siemens NX, current versions of CATIA, Origin, and OriginPro, most modules of ANSYS, Abaqus, and many specialized instrument or data-acquisition control packages used in chemistry, physics, and biology. This is especially true for interfaces to most universities' older instrumentation that many labs refuse to get rid of. Even Microsoft Excel, which is available on Mac, often falls short, as many labs depend on old and complex VBA macros, specialized add-ins, and plugins common in engineering lab data analysis and operations research that either do not work at all or run with reduced functionality compared to the native Windows version.

On top of that, even the macOS versions of many heavily used STEM platforms are more limited than their Windows counterparts. AutoCAD for Mac lacks specialized toolsets, full 3D rendering, Express Tools, and broad third-party plugin support. LabVIEW has a Mac version yet many hardware drivers toolkits and advanced modules remain limited or unavailable. ArcGIS Pro is Windows-only on the desktop, though web versions work. Certain optics and photonic design tools such as some configurations of Zemax OpticStudio also provide incomplete Mac support and various niche laboratory or instrument packages often ship with basic Mac ports that lag behind their Windows counterparts in features and driver support.
On the flip side, you can run Kubernetes on a PC without major issues using Docker Desktop, Minikube, Kind, k3s, or MicroK8s, all of which work on Windows, Linux, and macOS.

There is no way I would buy a generic STEM undergrad a Mac. You are viewing STEM as limited to Computer Science, Data Science, and Software Engineering when that is at best 10 percent of all STEM students. Most students (especially at the undergrad level) in biology, chemistry, physics, mathematics, mechanical engineering, civil engineering, chemical engineering, electrical engineering (outside of pure software tracks), and a vast number of other STEM fields will never be exposed to kubes. There are always some areas that might run into it, such as computational biology, bioinformatics, genomics, computational astronomy, or climate modeling, but these are very specific applications, and in truth, the lab they are working in will have their own hardware anyway.

The risk is not worth it in STEM as a sole platform. If they decide as a sophomore or junior they want to dive into a Mac-specific field, so be it and make the investment, but for the time being (and until many of the old dinosaurs retire and their lab equipment gets upgraded), you are better off getting a PC.

That is just how the world in Higher Ed STEM is set up. It is what it is.

It is a difficult issue to try to address, especially in the US, because it deals with people, mental disorders, addiction, and behavior, not just structural or institutional design failures.

The individual rights of each American make the current purely legislative approach impractical. Worse, it creates an opaque financial money pit, with many bad actors seeing an opportunity for almost unlimited graft.

We are allocating huge amounts of money at the federal, state, and local levels to "solve" a problem with no clear definition or metric for success, and a topic that tugs at people's heartstrings, so there will be almost limitless funding.

To begin to address the long-term homelessness epidemic would require accepting that we need to curtail the rights of the "unhoused" to force them to receive mental health and/or addiction treatment, and having the facilities available to forcibly house those who refuse treatment or are incapable of functioning in day-to-day society with assistance.

My basic red flags are people who don't put away their shopping carts, people who are rude to waitstaff, and those who are not courteous to office secretaries.