Kiernian @ Kiernian @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

195

Joined

2 yr. ago

The ability to easily hide individual threads.

Like, I've seen "Wendy's wants to go to Uber style pricing", I want the ability to mark it as "read" and set jerboa or lemmy.world in my browser to "show unread" and still have the ability to view my "read" items later if I want to refer back to them or whatever.

It would drastically improve my mobile experience and greatly improve my PC experience as well.

Lotta key parties in your neck of the woods?

I believe this is what "[sic]" is for.

It would set a horrible precedent.

I don't know the exact frequency specifics, but I know the FCC is super particular about any broadcast over a certain power on most wavelengths.

I imagine this is yet another instance where "mostly works" is in fact somewhat problematic in one way or another.

Except the overall hiring demand IS down and it has been since December.

You know it's bad when across the globe, IT systems administrators aren't even getting hit up by RECRUITERS.

In the U.S. at least, it's been a continually "in demand" field since we recovered from the U.S. housing market crash of '08-'09... right up until before the New Year.

Now I'm hearing the same thing from people in the field worldwide and that is that there's been an uncharacteristic hiring stall in a historically consistent field of IT infrastructure.

The same is supposedly true in other portions of infrastructure as well, likely because companies still view infrastructure as a cost center instead of a force multiplier.

It remains to be seen if the hiring silence will extend to full stack devs/programmers if this heavy layoff follow the leader garbage goes on much longer, but if it hits "revenue generator" departments, I'm afraid we'll start to see other companies tech stacks failing like Twitter's current functionality has.

No limiting consumer access to computer hardware.

Just no.

We still haven't recovered from early crypto crap with GPU's.

Fix the environmental rules for corpos so they can't just stand up data farms and simultaneously wreak havoc on the grid and the environment without paying the full cost to offset the damage they're doing.

I don’t think he can actually put that much together to appeal it.

Especially not since Habba kept saying "no objection" to all of the evidence the prosecution put in.

She just kept saying "Yup! That's totally acceptable and we'll agree it should be considered!"

Thank you for this explanation.

So I looked up what "federalizing the National Guard" means in this case.

The National Guard is a unique entity in that it answers to both state and federal governments. Troops can be mobilized by a state governor or the president, depending on need. The National Guard personnel restricting access to Shelby Park are on state orders as part of Operation Lone Star, Abbott’s sweeping border security initiative.

In theory, the president or the defense secretary could divert those troops by tasking them with a federal mission.

“There are a variety of statutes that allow the president to federalize the National Guard in different circumstances. But the only one that would clearly apply in this case is the Insurrection Act,” said Joseph Nunn, counsel at the Brennan Center’s Liberty and National Security Program.

Nunn described the Insurrection Act as a “nuclear bomb hidden in the United States Code” and explained that using it would be politically costly.

“The Insurrection Act gives the president sole discretion to decide whether the criteria for invoking it are met,” he explained. “There are quite literally no safeguards to stop it from being abused.”

Historically, Nunn said, presidents have only invoked the act to federalize National Guard troops as a last resort. That was the case in 1957, when President Dwight D. Eisenhower mobilized the Arkansas National Guard to enforce a Supreme Court ruling on desegregation.

So, this would mean USURPING the Governor's control of the Texas National Guard in order to get them to do something else.

THAT'S WHAT THEY WANT BIDEN TO DO.

THIS IS A STUNT.

THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SECESSION.

They want to be able to point to Biden's actions in this and say "Bad" in twelve different ways.

They ALSO want someone to invoke the insurrection act so everyone can have carte blanche to use it whenever they want LATER, no matter who is in control.

This is a horrible precedent to set.

This whole situation is bad.

Rep. Joaquin Castro said: "Governor Greg Abbott is using the Texas National Guard to obstruct and create chaos at the border."

The best option here might be to let his own idiocy backfire on him. I just hope there's a way to do it without more loss of life.

Again, no court would uphold that Texas is being invaded.

Which is good because if we classify border-crossing migrants as "invaders" then not only does that mean really bad things for them, it means Abbott was funneling invaders further inside our borders by paying to bus them to denver or fly them to chicago or whatever else.

It's pretty clear he didn't think the treasonous implications of this particular initiative through very well.

They weren't, which is why the SEC updated 17 CFR Parts 229, 232, 239, 240, and 249.

https://www.sec.gov/files/rules/final/2023/33-11216.pdf

As of December 18th of last year, publicly traded companies are now required to disclose breaches. (soz, material cybersecurity incidents).

Prior to that, they could ...basically... just effectively sweep everything under the rug "like it never happened" minus a little handwaving and paper shuffling and nobody would find out about it until the information got sold and went public.

I'll have to go looking but I would be SERIOUSLY surprised if the disclosures apply to credit card companies (the MOST breached, historically) because I'm not sure what exactly qualifies someone as an asset-backed issuer, but it's at least a really good step for the REST of things.

Deference only applies where the law is not specific.

But it only applies to to laws. Unless I misunderstand what you mean by "policies", it shouldn't apply there. Since it sounds like you're worried about overreach due to application of chevron deference, I was trying to see if I followed your train of thought correctly.

In my extremely limited understanding, the issue with the RIFO and Chevron Deference is that the gap is so damned wide with regards to how to regulate the internet that there needs to be a better test than "does the solution proposed in the RIFO fill the gap?" I would consider the RIFO to be such an outlier in cases of chevron deference law that it almost looks like a strawman when compared to other uses of chevron deference. We should definitely shore something up to allow future questioning of the wisdom of courses of action recommended by agencies when consulted in deference matters once the consequences of such deference have come to fruition, but that very possibility (as I understand it) is part of WHY the deference to agencies occurs instead of simply allowing judges to decide. The people at the agencies, being theoretically put in power for a set term, have more to lose from bad decision-making than judges-for-life do.

...when the bishops blessed the blueshirts down in galway....

I'm unaware of a solid answer on this.

It's an old enough nickname that the origins are likely lost to obscurity.

It's been said that it's a shortened version of "chip off the old block" but I find it more likely that it's an evolution of "chib" as it seems to predate the phrase, from what I can tell.

Household economics are both micro AND macro.

The handwaving that typically occurs when people try to throw a layer of obfuscation into economic conversations is both disingenuous and counterproductive to actual fruitful discussion about the current state of things.

You might as well just say "money is wealth" or "what's good for the goose".

The reality is we've been chasing a short run fallacy for a really, really long time now and there's more and more in the way of misrepresented statistics in order to keep everyone from examining all of the indirect consequences.

Happy as in "all absolutely necessary for survival bills are getting paid on time, all outstanding debts are getting paid down regularly, and I can afford to eat at a restaurant slightly above fast food grade once a month or so?"

$308,740/yr for the first year would do it.

After that I could probably look at halving the salary and live, if not comfortably, at least without constant worry.

Maybe start putting something away so I can retire before I hit 70.

Happiness doesn't come from money, but it sure would reduce stress.

The problem isn’t that the courts are deferring to the agencies. The problem is the degree of deference. I have no problem with presuming agency policies are valid, provided a plaintiff is afforded the opportunity to rebut that presumption in court.

Okay, but isn't the current setup such that deference is only a concern for issues that have already passed through formal law?

It would be hilarious if this was overturned, Biden was elected and he filled the nation with progressive justices.

...who then use their newfound power to close a crapload of loopholes, then re-write chevron in a way that it can't be taken down so easily again so it becomes much harder to create more loopholes or abolish good laws when people with bad intentions have power.

That'd be the best outcome of it getting overturned in my mind, anyway.

Okay, can someone explain THIS giant load of seeming bullshit to me?

In 2023, the U.S. economy vastly outperformed expectations. A widely predicted recession never happened. Many economists (though not me) argued that getting inflation down would require years of high unemployment; instead, we’ve experienced immaculate disinflation, rapidly falling inflation at no visible cost.

By every marker that matters to the POPULACE (costs of food, shelter, energy for shelter, cars, gas for cars, and medical insurance (required)) inflation has gone WAY THE HELL UP, shows no signs of abating, and jobs (in the tech sector at least) are taking a dive. Wages are not keeping pace with costs of living, and people I knew who were on the low end of "rich" are now starting to be as scared as the upper middle class.

Everyone keeps saying the economy is fricking awesome, but rent is astronomical, groceries are bonkers, gas prices are still at "I DID THIS" sticker stupidity levels, few people can get a home, used cars are going for 5 to 10 times what they're worth, and everyone I know around the country is running a much tighter ship than they were during COVID LOCKDOWN.

All of these "new jobs" we keep hearing about are just a small percentage of positions vacated by layoffs. Companies let tons of people go in one fell swoop and hire new people for 1/10th to 1/5th of the positions at lower wages with worse "total compensation" packages.

The recruiters have COMPLETELY stopped hitting up myself and my employed friends. Not a single fricking "you look like a great blahblahblah" for almost a month when it was previously multiple hits a day.

As far as I can tell, we're IN a recession, we're just calling it a recovery for some reason.

Yeah, so they changed it so it defaults to the "new" way where quotes and -UnwantedTerm don't function the way they used to, but when you fill out the search box, hit "Google Search", and it fails to perform the way you want it to, once you're on the results page, go to "Tools" click on "All Results" and change it to "Verbatim".