saveferris

Heck, I live in the burbs and do Costco delivery all the time. I dont want to carry them either :-)

But, this decision didn't take those powers from Congress. It took those powers from federal agencies. Congress empowers the agencies, yes. But, Congress also deferred any technical decisioning to the agencies. Those agencies are filled with actual experts who are fully committed to their field. Now, the court just said that those experts aren't the right place to enforce anything but judges are.

Today it is. While not the existential threat to the US that communism/China are or perceived to be, Japan was very much a threat to the US in the 80s/90s. All kinds of concerns not just about the car market but manufacturing in general, how much real estate Japan owned, how much treasuries Japan owned, etc,

I know a few people who lost their collective minds when a Japanese guy bought Pebble Beach. Turned out to be a terrible move on his part.

Japan was very much a threat to the US back then. Maybe more perceived than reality but a lot of the same rhetoric/narrative you see today about China, was Japan vs the US back then.

I understand and generally agree with your sentiment but people are safer. Violent crime is down substantially since 2001 and even more since 1990s.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/191219/reported-violent-...

Supisingly, so are motor vehicle thefts. Though, they are on the rise since the pandemic.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/191213/reported-motor-ve...

https://www.statista.com/statistics/191216/reported-motor-ve...

So, KPI wise you can make an argument that it is effective. I may not agree with that argument in that we (USA) spend a lot of money and impose a lot of restrictions on the general population to get there.

Crime has always been a "the sky is falling" kind of a thing even if it's literally one crime. We are more safe than we were in 2001 by any objective measure, whether or not that is "safe enough" is going to be different for everyone...

Off the top of my head.... -How was the labor sourced for those services? -Child Labor, illegal immigrant labor? -What are the working conditions for the labor?, is it sweatshop -what inputs go into the goods/services? -what do they do with their waste? -where do the inputs come from? My country, another country, my town, a town in my state...

you may think the government plays a role to enforce some of these, and they do to a point...

You can go on in your own head about all the things behind that simple exchange of money for something. If it's a perfectly competitive market sure, that may work but there aren't many if any markets in the US that are that level of competitive.

A personal anecdote for you. My uncle owns an auto parts re-manufacturer, so they rebuild car parts and sell them. I worked there a lot growing up. The normal input is buying "cores" from service stations....your starter motor isn't working and you get a new one, that old one is sold to someone like my uncle who refurbs it.

Often we had people come by with very clearly stolen parts....should we have just exchanged money for those? This ranged from a tweaker who would show up with one part, to full scale organized theft rings with pallets of parts...

So, do we buy those since the price is much, much better? There is a an ethical decision there...

You can look at it like this... They jury was concerned about the speech by the think tank. They don't want anyone else to have to suffer through it. The plaintiff though didn't have actual monetary damages from it, but you and me might have.

The jury is signaling, stronly, that this type of speech isn't allowed and should be punished. The fact that it happened to someone who wasn't monetarily harmed much by it isn't relevant but let's put a high bar out there to deter anyone else from this type of speech towards people who could be damaged.

The way the laws work it is really the only thing they could do if they believed the defendant's speech is harmful.

That's how I read into the monetary awards...

So, I think you are correct. The jury messed up, wasn't explained to properly, etc. There are thresholds on how much punitive damages can be awarded and they are some multiple of the other damages...this one is more than that.

The reasons were...."....after finding that the pair made their statements with “maliciousness, spite, ill will, vengeance or deliberate intent to harm.”

So, the jury found that they made statements that were willfully intended to harm someone - they were deliberate to inflict harm. They found that the actual harm wasn't much in monetary terms but decided to levy a large punitive award to signal to others not to do this and punish the two that did.

That makes sense. You have to prove actual damages, either the plaintff didn't try to or were unsuccessful...so $1 and then a larger amount to punish the behavior and deter others from doing it.

They can be fired but if so the school is still on the hook for paying out the rest of their contract....so, maybe easy to do but painful financially.

Football coach but the same principles apply: https://www.texastribune.org/2023/11/12/jimbo-fisher-buyout/

And it's not like it hasnt been known for a long time how dangerous silica can be. I worked in a chemical manufacturing plant as an engineering intern in the 80s, at a plant that made marine coatings. One of the products contained silica as an ingredient. The precautions that went into the production of that product were crazy, workers entering the area had to wear what amounted to space suits with full respirators. I vividly recall putting these suits on any time we had to do any work in that production area.

I am only half serious about that....should have pointed that out. Interesting links though. Correct that not everyone with income is required to file, though they should. I did not know the income level was that high though, would have guessed half that.

Just a guess but I think that overlap is probably pretty large. I would think the majority of people who don't owe taxes are due to lower incomes who would not be required to file and that is offset with deductions....purely a guess though.

I am curious what you think could happen. I did a lot of looking after all the allegations and all the lawsuits. It is remarkably secure today, all the lawsuis that have been filed, etc. and nothing was found.

Where do you think the vulnerabilities are that can be exploited?

There is a lot of things wrong with this but I have said that in order to get your tax refund you have to show proof you registered to vote. I'd like to say proof that you voted but that may be a step too far...

Agree, it should be easier not harder to register and to vote

One of the interesting by products of all of this is that elections are getting less secure instead of more secure. After all these allegations came out and if you dug into how elections are run, they are pretty secure - not perfect of course. Now, you have states opting out of things like the registry that can detect if a voter votes in more than one state. So, it will be harder to catch a person voting in more than one state now. I guess that only applies to presidential elections where that would be illegal but I am sure people have voted in more than one local election too and they should not have.

I live in Illinois and I don't know if it is free or not but you can get a sate ID here that is not a drivers license and use that to register to vote.

A national version could make sense. Since the more voters there are only helps one party, we'll never see anything like that on a national level no matter how much sense it makes.

I have the same issue and just now found it was because of Private Relay. I did not connect the fact that I had no issues accessing archive.is when I had a VPN on - which disables Private Relay. Since they got a location, not my location but a location they were hunky dory....

I saw this post and tried it with and without Private Relay and sure enough, turning it on is the issue. Good to know....

Edit: I updated Private Relay to "Maintain general location" for IP Address Location Settings and archive.is loads fine.

Second Edit: Maybe not, it all works now and I think it is either session or cache. I got to play around with it

Ohhhh, now that is interesting. I think I'd say you don't have an expectation of privacy when you park your car on a public street, people can look into the windows and if they are tinted then using a device to "see" through the tint doesn't go over the line to circumvent your expectation of privacy - if items were in the trunk....maybe that elevates the expectation of privacy but leaving something on the seat or something that can be seen looking into the windows of a car parked out in public seems like you should not expect a high level of privacy.

Your house/apartment on the other hand...you should expect a high/higher level of privacy there, even looking into the windows - if something is found looking into the windows it should not be admissible as evidence without a warrant.

I do not know if the law actually distinguishes privacy if it's a car vs a residence.

It has been a bit but I believe you can log in to Music and Messages with a separate appleid. I believe you have to login to the app store though with the ID assigned to the machine. I am not 100% sure that is still the case though.

So, I think you can have the Mac and app store on a work id and then Messages and Music on your personal ID.

thanks, could not remember it and my google fu was poor trying to look for it :-)

There is some statistical thing about fraud and the frequency of certain numbers being made up. I don't recall it specifically but made up amounts, dates, number have certain clusters of numbers vs what normally occurs.

edit; didn't get all that was in my head out :-) So, it could be made up or support the fact that actual docs or good record keeping weren't a thing.

Not the poster you asked. But, a lesson we continue to ignore is that there are other options to tame inflation besides raising interest rates. The problem is the option isn’t politically expedient so Congress just raises its hands in mock exasperation and says well, it’s the Fed’s mandate to manage inflation.

Congress are cowards and won’t do what should be done - raise taxes. That is likely the fastest least painful long term solution to quickly climbing inflation

I say likely solution because at this point economies are so complex I’m not certain there are solutions without any butterfly effect consequences

The issue is under what authority does the government have to put such a ban in place. There isn't one today. The article discusses some attempts to work around that issue, all of which are problematic.

The article does not mention it but all the work arounds also rely on the fact that ByteDance is a Chinese company. So far they have been reluctant to change that but they could easily incorporate in the US. The parent company today is Chinese but the parent could become a US or EU company and then all of this banning talk gets even more dicey to pull off.

Not so fast....In Illinois anyway. You cannot do any of that without consent if you use that data for any commercial purpose.

https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs3.asp?ActID=3004&C...

I think anyway, IANAL but I believe this law prohibits the collection of, in this case, images/facial recognition, etc.

So, you can take my picture in public and keep it on your phone, you cannot upload it to say Instagram without my permission, all kinds of recent lawsuits about it. I think the intent of the law is to prevent my picture from winding up in say Instagram without my permission but for sure it cannot be used in the way it was used in the article - to scan it and prohibit me from entering an establishment. Apparently, no matter what state I go to....

https://www.reuters.com/technology/one-us-state-stands-out-r...

It's a complex law and a complex topic in general so I am not 100% sure what is and isn't covered....

edit; spelling

https://www.barrons.com/articles/meta-jpmorgan-stock-price-r...

It happens every day....

Yes, it is an ad. The only distinction is the boosted "ad" starts life as an organic post instead of a created ad.

Yes, Apple modified the status quo...they didn't enforce this for Meta until recently - Twitter, TikTok et al all pay via IAP and Apple is now enforcing this for Meta.

Yes again, it is related to the fact that boosted posts are done via the Facebook app and the economic value is created in that same app vs Ads Manager where the "purchase" is in the Ads Manager app and the economic value shows up in the Facebook app - or on the web.

And...yes, the rules are fluid from Apple. Yeah, I think it makes logical sense per the IAP rules to buy a Kindle book in the Amazon app and then consume it in the Kindle app but I bet Apple and Amazon had talks about that and Apple would not guarantee they would not try to get 30% of those sales so Amazon said...nope, not able to buy a Kindle book on the Amazon iOS app. Which, is exactly what Meta was doing till Apple "clarified" its rules and now wants them to pay for boosted...

Our firm is small and we avoid any possibility of Apple trying to grab 30% or our revenue...so, no app for us at all.

I agree about the over reach part. I am not an Apple apologist at all and agree with others that when device growth stalls (it will) and then services growth stalls (it will) Apple when then really start its ads push and a further push into getting it's 30% tribute on all app purchases.

But, This isn't yet a stretch into all ad spend - I do think Apple will go there too eventually.

In practice Apple is saying paying to boost an organic post is in effect an "in app purchase". They are correct. The purchase happens in the Facebook "blue" app. I actually haven't seen or done it with a boosted post but that is what Apple is saying. You post something via the Facebook "blue" app...get a notice that it's been seen by a few people, so pay a bit to get it seen by more and all of that is done via that one app....so an "in app purchse".

Regular ads are done with the Ads Manager app....a separate app from the Facebook "blue" app. So, ads themselves are not yet subject to this 30% bounty. Again I haven't done it on the app but in the web ads manager you can boost a post from there too so likely you can in the Ads Manager app...not sure though. If you can then you avoid the 30%. I suspect most if not all small businesses, etc have no idea what Ads Manager is or are not very familiar with it.

I have a particular disdain for the app store generally so I don't like this at all. But, you can see where Apple has been and will go...force everything to an app instead of mobile web browser (by nerfing webkit on iOS) than force 30% tribute on "purchases".

I have no idea how this escapes any anti trust scrutiny, especially compared to what M$FT did with IE back in the day and got dinged for it.

Not just Safari but all web browsers on iOS, they all have to be webkit...all are handicapped to push users to apps from the app store.

I dont know what the policies are now but I was an inspector for the electric company (PSE&G in north Jersey) for a few summers in college. Mostly, someone would call in about their bill being high and we'd go check and find someone had run power from their meter so they were paying for a neighbor. We'd report it, someone would come out and usually just remove the offender. I don't even think they even tried to find out where it went. As far as I know the matter was dropped at that point. No charges filed, etc. even though it was theft of some kind since it was intentional.

Maybe today with EVs there is a different approach. I don't know. Some of the things people would do not to play their electric bill were literally shocking :-)

Some updated figures through 2021 Solar = 2.8% Wind = 9.2%

Total renewables = 20.1%, that includes hydro which may not be as renewable as we thought.

Just had this discussion but relative to why not re-invest in nuclear so we looked up the amount of nuclear energy (~20%).

Not sure if we are looking at different sources, they are counted differently, etc.

Source for this is; https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3

Ah, that explains why so many of the financial firms want people back in the office so badly :-)

I admittedly have no idea how it works, what the differences are but the article infers that the tech developed here can be used for vaccines. From the article:

“If it does,” he added, “it might provide a new therapeutic and also contribute to new vaccine strategies.”

Maybe you know, is this just for therapeutics and not vaccines?

Edit: looks like someone else answered this below....

Generally, I would agree with you...let the market decide the price. But, car dealers have successfully "cornered the market" with state franchise laws. It is not a competitive market so it won't operate normally.

So much is "wrong" with the dealership model relative to a competitive market I don't even know where to start. But, I do believe over time the franchise laws and dealer cartels will change dramatically. We're seeing that start to happen now with Tesla's model and Ford is creating a new model that looks a lot like Tesla's. Some states, looking at you TX, will continue to protect the local dealers cause the dealer associations donate a lot of money to state politicians but the tide will eventually turn...at least I think it will.