Nollij @ Nollij @sopuli.xyz

Posts

0

Comments

978

Joined

2 yr. ago

He's even stated as much, just not recently. It was about his tax cuts for the rich, and how she would have to love him for all the money he sent her way.

It makes sense, given that he's never known a love that he hasn't had to pay for.

Even at stores that have this feature, I rarely see people use it. It's clearly not an experience that people flock to.

OTOH, on the rare occasion I've visited a Walmart in the past 10 years, I have a 100% rate of checkout taking an absurdly long time. Everyone there just seems to accept it like they have no choice.

As long as it's advertised openly, I don't see a big problem with it. It would probably be sold as a discount for shopping at slower times, though. It's a tried-and-true method of smoothing congestion.

Assuming a store with 9a-9p hours (every day), a 9-5 worker can shop 44 hours in a week, vs 40 they cannot. But that doesn't particularly line up with the busy hours. Around here, after 7 on weekdays and 5 on weekends tend to get pretty slow.

Economies of scale affects the costs to the manufacturer. Competition/demand affect the price to the consumer.

There's a problem with your premise. NATO (much like the UN) is not a military force of its own. Rather, it's an agreement between many nations, each with their own militaries. There is no NATO army. There is an agreement of the United States (with its army), the UK (with its army). Germany (with its army), etc.

Each of them could independently invade. They could even negotiate an agreement to invade. But that would have limited impact on NATO. The big thing would be that any invading country loses the agreed upon defenses of the rest.

There are many reasons to avoid Tesla, regardless of Musk. The complete lack of independent repair was my deal breaker, but you'll find your own. Their competition is looking pretty good these days, too.

To extend this, consider your own safety throughout. Unless the police arrest them and they remain in custody, you have a potential serious threat. Avoid situations where you/others could be vulnerable, such as alone or at night. You may want to setup visible surveillance cameras, alter your routines, etc.

The police will be there after anything happens, but that may be too late for you.

It's based on an ex post facto law, which is expressly forbidden by the constitution. I don't like the results in this case, but it's a stronger argument than most people have when petitioning SCOTUS.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto_law

It would vacate his conviction and get him out of prison. His life after may not be great, but he still has money.

As for his future career, people tend to forget/ignore all of that anyway. Chris Brown savagely beat Rihanna nearly to death, and he still has no problems booking a tour. But even if it was still a thing, he'd just say (accurately, mind you) that it was all just a plan by his lawyers. It was the most effective way of getting him out of prison, and clearing his record.

Pretty much, yeah. The big thing is that they wouldn't have access to the candidates' strategy. But most of that is pretty public. We already know a few of Harris' talking points. We also know some of the things they will steer away from. What we don't know is if there are any planned pivots later on, like an October Surprise

https://www.aamc.org/news/press-releases/new-aamc-report-shows-continuing-projected-physician-shortage

As someone in IT, I can tell you that it is incredibly hard to fill most of our common sysadmin roles. We don't even get applicants with the desired qualifications (SCCM, Azure, VMware, MS SQL, Power Shell, etc. Not in the same role, but these common skills). This is despite the fact that we're competitive on pay, allow fully remote, and are a household name (fortune 100). I sincerely doubt that we're alone on that.

As for your point about unemployed STEM grads, it's entirely possible that they are in an area that has a surplus. But it's also possible they are inexperienced (most employers want experience), or they don't know how to connect with the employers looking for their skill set.

I'm not saying that I'm sold on the idea. Just that it's not entirely clear what the impact would be, nor that it would be a net negative.

I'm not sure I agree with your last point. While skilled foreign labor (H1B or similar) certainly drives down wages, part of that is because of the restrictions on employment. If you need to be sponsored, it is very hard to get the prevailing local wage for your skills. Green cards open that up and allow proper competition.

The biggest argument is that foreign-born workers are willing to accept lower wages for the same work and the same conditions. This is exactly what happened during the days of "No Irish Need Apply". The big difference here is that it would only apply to college graduates. But is it actually wrong to do? It's similar to a bad union, where people feel entitled to the higher pay simply because they were here first.

While it would still be better to encourage and grow our own people to develop the skills needed, this is a much more complicated proposal. We have a distinct lack of skilled workers, and in a variety of types/areas. This could help with that need.

I fully agree on the rest though. Fuck Trump and everyone around him.

Will this help users on Bing with their number 1 desired search destination, Google?

Or their 7th most common destination, Bing?

Source: https://www.theverge.com/2021/10/1/22703263/google-lawyer-argues-bing-used-find-google-top-search-defaults

Not necessarily. They could split the video in advance, assuming the ads will always be at the same point. Even if not, they could still use the direct, unaltered source with a range. The big challenge would be keeping it all synced, which I think is safe to say that they will get right.

But even if it did need to be transcoded, YouTube automatically transcodes every single video uploaded, multiple times. They are clearly not afraid of it.

I said nothing of the sort, and have no idea where you got that idea. All I said was that marketing claims are separate from the contract.

However, this thread is clearly not interested in any actual exchange of ideas or information, so I will no longer be taking part. Go ahead and downvote.

1. False advertising has nothing to do with breach of contract. Completely separate sections of law.
2. Nothing offered in perpetuity will stand up in court. You can argue about reasonable terms, but it can never be forever.
3. Marketing gets you into the contract. The contract holds the actual terms that both (or all) parties are bound to.

Maga will not die with Trump. Instead it will splinter, and become a lot more chaotic. Even moreso if that happens at a time of strength for the movement.

Because it might get them the Whitehouse

I would be surprised if this goes anywhere meaningful. Those were marketing promises, not contract terms. I noticed the promotion ended just over 2 years before the price hike, indicating that everyone had completed their contract. Once the contract is over, either side can walk away, or renegotiate terms.

It negates the point of a contract. What kind of contract even has a term of length without a set price?