gruez

27 ms·

631.
by gruez 4mo ago
Aren't those collected consensually (and pretty explicitly) as part of insurance programs?
632.
by gruez 4mo ago
> But considering that "internal investigators" are likely hired (directly or indirectly) by the CEO, are likely shareholders in the company, and so they have little incentive to fully investigate. Right, but no prosecutor is l
633.
by gruez 4mo ago
>To the topic in question, PPP was not really a big deal. The real culprit is this: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CP - the corporate profits literally DOUBLED since 2020 because of earlier Trump's tax cuts
634.
by gruez 4mo ago
But the bill in question passed the house 419 - 6 and the senate 96 - 0?
635.
by gruez 4mo ago
>I don’t see how this graph shows that claim. It says it’s graphing the effect of welfare on income ratios between top 10% vs the bottom 50% then just has an arrow pointing down saying “Stronger redistribution” The chart is supposed acco
636.
by gruez 4mo ago
So was "the same way Roosevelt did, 94% tax rate on the rich"
637.
by gruez 4mo ago
And yet, the amount of redistribution that's happening has never been higher, far exceeding the era of "94% tax rate on the rich", never mind that nobody actually paid that rate because the tax code was full of exemptions at
638.
by gruez 4mo ago
>ensuring that the money went out willy-nilly and that $700+ billion in "loans" were turned into a straight up gift from the taxpayers. Wasn't that widely understood during the pandemic? All the coverage I've seen men
639.
by gruez 4mo ago
>>its lowest since December 2023. That should already make you skeptical, and after looking at the chart, I'm more on side "all is fine" than the doom narrative the article is pushing.
640.
by gruez 4mo ago
>Don't we already? So clearly we should... make it even more lenient? That's what OP was implying.
641.
by gruez 4mo ago
>The internal investigation has determined that our CEO had no knowledge of this, and that the bloody pig mask was all the idea of the people who make less money, and also we fired the CEO for unrelated reasons. That's exactly how t
642.
by gruez 4mo ago
If you think that denying a specific treatment (justified or otherwise) is comparable murder for hire, then I don't think there's anything worth discussing between the two of us.
643.
by gruez 4mo ago
That's their job? It's not even limited to private insurance companies. Public health systems have lists of what is considered good value for money too, even if the treatments themselves are theoretically life saving. The US is th
644.
by gruez 4mo ago
Again, no. If some drug company killed a single person with a weird side effect that they buried, do you think it'll be discovered, much less prosecuted? The Sacklers got prosecuted because the opiod epidemic was huge, not because they
645.
by gruez 4mo ago
Not to mention that unless the bitlocker activation flow changed recently, it specifically asks you how to store your backup keys, with a choice given been local options (eg. usb drive, printing it off, etc.) and saving it to your microsoft
646.
by gruez 4mo ago
>It's so fun how corporations are protected from individual liability They're not. If you hire a hitman through a corporation it doesn't magically become legal.
647.
by gruez 4mo ago
>for things like shoplifting and vandalism it should be double or triple damages with no prison What do you think the chances of being caught shoplifting is? If it's less than 50-33%, then you have the same problem as the OP where i
648.
by gruez 4mo ago
>The US ruled similarly to Japan, but years ago, from copyrights through patents... from my limited POV, the LLMs (specifically) and art models are just regurgitating stolen concepts... echo'ing Picasso's great artists steal! m
649.
by gruez 4mo ago
>The vast majority of scams literally work by them asking their victims to buy cryptocurrency or gift cards directly. Malware is exceedingly rare. Source? This article suggests otherwise: https://www.economist.com/interac
650.
by gruez 4mo ago
Are they such new/fleeting friends that they can't wait 24 hours? Otherwise, it might be a good thing that people can't be persuaded to install an app because a "friend" told them to, and it's somehow so urgent
651.
by gruez 4mo ago
>and having a certified developer program with heavily locked down run mode for the 1% of high security apps like banking and payment apps. How do you determine/enforce whether an app is a "payment app" without a centraliz
652.
by gruez 4mo ago
Right, instead they download shady magisk modules that promise them free fortnite skins.
653.
by gruez 4mo ago
>If the user cannot be trusted with their own data, then there is no solution anyway. They'll just tell their private data to a scammer on the phone instead. Security isn't binary. Putting up barriers makes it harder for scamme
654.
by gruez 4mo ago
>> Google’s Android—and [Open Handset Alliance] members are contractually prohibited from building non-Google approved devices >So to compete you'd have to create a compatible Google Play Services as well as find a supporting
655.
by gruez 4mo ago
I'm not sure how the element itself increases fingerprinting surface more than the status quo. Not to mention manually blocking it makes you even fingerprintable
656.
by gruez 4mo ago
>Tech looks high compared to everyone else, but it is more that everyone else's wages got suppressed. Where do you draw the line? Maybe everyone should be earning $10M/year like AI researchers, and anything to the contrary mean
657.
by gruez 4mo ago
>but to collect sales and then ask the customer to cancel How does that help them?
658.
by gruez 4mo ago
>but subdomain is probably easier to square Why would it be? Is there some client/OS that doesn't support custom paths for DoH?
659.
by gruez 4mo ago
/s?
660.
by gruez 4mo ago
>Still, this makes my case even stronger since personal controls for adding more earners to a household. If real median personal income only rose from ~$28k in 1974 to ~45$k today, that's a 60% increase. Labor force participation ra

More ›