A journalist in the financial press noticed that Trump often reduced tariff rates in time for stock trading on Tuesday, and coined the term TACO Tuesday. The acronym stands for Trump Always Chickens Out.

Predictably, this annoys the Snowflake in Chief, so many Democrats have doubled down on the chance to annoy Donald Trump:

... The Democratic National Committee handed out free tacos from a truck emblazoned with the term and an image of Trump in a chicken suit near the Republican National Committee's headquarters in Washington this week. Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., posted a photo of an unappetizing taco lunch on BlueSky and wrote, "It's TACO Tuesday on Capitol Hill! I hear the White House celebrates every day." And in a foolishly hawkish spin on the quip, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer recently condemned "TACO Trump" for negotiating a nuclear deal with Iran after his tough talk toward the country. [links omitted]

As the rest of Zeeshan Aleem's opinion piece shows, not everyone on that side of the aisle is laughing or on board with this kind of provocation. Aleem elaborates on three reasons he thinks the Democrats should cut out the TACO talk:

1. TACO is not entirely accurate.
2. [It dares] Trump to follow through on his most extreme tariff threats.
3. [It] threatens to undermine Democrats' messaging that Trump poses an existential threat to democracy... [I]t's a bit odd to simultaneously argue that Trump is all talk and no action.

I would also add that, to the degree that any political opponent of Trump values freedom, that this issue is identical to Trump's juvenile taunting of the left:

It may be fun to see the likes of Nancy Pelosi [or Trump --ed] getting a taste of their own medicine, but irritating Democrats [or Trumpists --ed ] is not the same thing as defeating them. More important, it definitely fails to advance the cause of freedom, and is probably setting it back.

I will admit that I enjoyed a few laughs from some of the TACO Tuesday memes, but it's time to consign them to the dustbin, and work to do the same with the Trump tariffs.

-- CAV

Source - Patreon

Scharon Harding, writing at Ars Technica:

“Just disconnect your TV from the Internet and use an Apple TV box.”

That’s the common guidance you’ll hear from Ars readers for those seeking the joys of streaming without giving up too much privacy. Based on our research and the experts we’ve consulted, that advice is pretty solid, as Apple TVs offer significantly more privacy than other streaming hardware providers.

But how private are Apple TV boxes, really? Apple TVs don’t use automatic content recognition (ACR, a user-tracking technology leveraged by nearly all smart TVs and streaming devices), but could that change? And what about the software that Apple TV users do use — could those apps provide information about you to advertisers or Apple?

In this article, we’ll delve into what makes the Apple TV’s privacy stand out and examine whether users should expect the limited ads and enhanced privacy to last forever.

tvOS is perhaps Apple’s least-talked-about platform. (It surely has orders of magnitude more users than VisionOS, but VisionOS gets talked about because it’s so audacious.) But it might be their platform that’s the furthest ahead of its competition. Not because tvOS is insanely great, but it’s at least pretty good, and every other streaming TV platform seems to be in a race to make real the future TV interface from Idiocracy. It’s not just that they’re bad interfaces with deplorable privacy, it’s that they’re outright against the user.

Chris Vaughan created a self-guided PowerPoint slide-show version of my short essay on modern and postmodern art: “Post-postmodern Art” slide show [downloadable PowerPoint]. Also here is a PDF version of the text with the relevant, illustrative images. Related: My more-fully developed talk at ESEADE University, Buenos Aires, Argentina: