This is either a bald faced lie or demonstrates an extreme ignorance of history. There have been tons of Spanish speakers in the United States for a loooong time. Before Texas joined the United States, Spanish was an official language, as in 1837 a law was passed to ensure all laws were translated into Castilian.

> Be it resolved, by the senate and house of representatives of the republic of Texas, in congress assembled, That in justice to that numerous portion of our fellow citizens who understand only the Spanish language...

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth45355/m1/99/

You think all these Spanish speakers just disappeared when Texas became a state?

You think there were also no Spanish speakers in the rest of the Western territories? No Spanish speakers left in the parts of Florida Spain originally conquered? No Spanish speakers left at all in the lands that became the state of California or Nevada or New Mexico?

> In 1980 the US was 95% white

More like 80% white. Even in the 1950s the black population was ~10%. If the black population is historically ~10%ish, how is the white population going to be 95% when we also break out other ethnicities? Strange how you're consistently overrepresenting white English speakers in your falsehoods. Interesting pattern you've got there.

https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d20/tables/dt20_101.20.a...

https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/decennial/1950/...

> The root of all western Ethnic issues are Zionists.

Ah, I see now. Hunch confirmed. Makes sense about why you tend to lie in a consistent pattern.

Assuming lots of material local to the context one is wanting to translate is included, why couldn't it potentially access that additional context?

Think business accounts. The name on the card might be some agent of the company but they're not directly responsible for paying the debt. The business is responsible for the debt.

It's insane to me how so many people bring up the idea of EVs catching fire when ICE vehicles are constantly having recalls for spontaneously catching fire.

I've had multiple recalls on multiple ICE cars advising me to not park the car near my house. I haven't with my EV.

I doubt this is really reducing the rates of flaring and leaky wells. Its just additional demand.

The biggest problem I've seen is they tend to build these somewhat close to residential areas with generation on-site. Often these power generation centers aren't right next to residential areas due to both air and noise pollution. But governments are often seeming to turn a blind eye.

https://www.datacenterknowledge.com/hyperscalers/new-from-mi...

Seems pretty small for a platform they're so confident about.

Oh, they only have a tiny fleet in a few cities which are still mostly monitored? Strange.

No, the RAV-4 won that title. Its also pretty easy to make that claim when you're only making practically two models of vehicles compared to most other companies with several models. A single car selling well isn't necessarily telling the whole story.

> Even the CT is the best selling EV pickup

Easy to do when 20%+ are being bought by the ownership's other companies.

The CT is a massive failure measured by their own stated expectations. They stated they'd sell somewhere between 250,000-500,000 units a year. They ended up selling only a bit over 20,000 last year.

FWIW, the F-150 Lightning outsold the CT for 2025.

There's practically no way there's enough RF spectrum to handle that many clients from even LEO. There's a reason why carriers are moving to smaller and smaller and smaller cells, and places like sports venues have highly directional antenna arrays to handle the number of active clients. Will there be customers? Sure. Probably a lot! Will it be an actually massive chunk of the overall subscriber base mostly using their networks? Not a chance.

They can't even get capacity up enough to support their rural customers on practically idealized antenna array hardware.

> Setting up data centers in orbit (easier said than done) would be another huge revenue stream.

What applications demand that kind of premium on cost of running? Why choose that instead of terrestrial datacenters? What's the overall use-case for why one should bother deploying their applications into a space datacenter? I'm genuinely asking. Aside from needing to ensure low-ish latency to the most remote parts of the world and being willing to pay whatever to have that, I don't get it.

Not necessarily blaming you for the relationship fault, but someone forcing using the software improperly isn't really a failure of the software.

Technically speaking, Windows does support client-side caching on network drives. I've used it in the past for a highly limited number of users (read: me, on a personal share) and it works kind of like OneDrive/Dropbox/other cloud platform. But it's really rough and doesn't handle conflicts well.

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/iis/web-hosting/configurin...

But you're putting far too much weight on food deserts on "why do Americans eat so much junk food". 6% of Americans live in food deserts. I imagine way more than 6% of Americans regularly eat junk food.