Collectively agreeing to raising prices is anti-competitive collusion and illegal.
Collectively raising prices is anti-competitive coordination and legal.
Pandemic and supply shocks is a perfect excuse to do the latter.
Good luck to whoever is trying to solve this.
Unix people today : “NICE NICE”
Unix people today from 20:28:10 to 20:28:20 GMT : “NICE NICE NICE NICE”
The patent story reveals a lot.
Government:
Also government:
Donate to propublica.org - they produce a lot of great journalism.
Well, the far right faction of Republicans did already side with Dems to oust the speaker.
That’s spoiling at that point
Do you think an average person in 13th century had a better quality of life than an average person living in the 21st century?
Is that a “random person on the Internet” take or something substantiated?
Most statements I don’t have qualms with, but from my understanding, “liberals embrace ID politics” seems way off. I could see an argument that there’s some kind of split across people who’d identify as or match a typical understanding of a liberal, along the ID politics line, given that it’s so divisive. Id say liberal as a concept existed way before ID politics, do when that became prominent, a lot of people got split along that line. I.e. Far right probably split 90:10, Conservatives probably split 75:25, Liberals probably split closer to 50:50, while social left split 25:75, far left split 10:90 and libertarians split 1:99.
Hey, at least your average, retarded, left take seems to be (at least from my limited experience here) somewhat more palatable than your average, retarded, right take.
Data I’ve seen suggests otherwise. Care to engage with me so that we can figure out where the discrepancy lies?
First one looks like a motorized hang glider, dropping something to the ground at the end. Probably smuggling something. Drugs is my guess.
Yes, but expecting corporations to do it on their own is silly. They operate in a competitive environment so game theory should tell us what’s going to usually happen. The laws and regulations exist, and a lot more are needed, but it’s also not as simple because costs of enforcement also range from inexpensive to infeasible. In the end, it’s people making self-interested decisions, whether on behalf of themselves or on behalf of corporations. I don’t know of any easy solutions - my feeling is that those don’t exist - so the best bet is to steer society towards better and more effective politics. More distributed and less concentrated power structures, checks and balances, enforcement, novel, effective, and efficient systems through science based analysis, as well as lots of trials and errors and fast iterative improvements based on rapid feedback loops. In short, the world nowadays moves faster than the current government systems and it’s a losing battle until governing adaptability can increase in speed.
This describes stealing better than capitalism. And stealing is as old as nature.
Conclusion
The Equifax data breach from 2017 stands out as one of the largest data breaches in history, impacting millions of individuals. It is the result of several mistakes made by Equifax:
That’s what happens when corps cheap out on IT security. Storing so much personal sensitive data and not putting in the work needed to properly safeguard it. Good IT is hard, but not impossible.
I’ll get back to civ when I retire. It can get too life-ruiningly addictive for me.
If they are gonna burn religious books, why not include more of them? Burn bibles, qurans, vedas, tanakhs, etc. Make the event more inclusive :)
You don’t sound like an asshole at all. I realize people have different cultural norms, but in my family, grandparents can’t impose their will on how our kids are raised by us and that’s a strict matter of principle. They’re free to opine, they’re free to disagree, but the buck stops there. Ego power trips are frowned upon :)
I’d say your FIL is making a big mistake with such an ultimatum and should be encouraged to reconsider.
If it’s just about the jewelry issue, it might seem like avoiding confrontation might be worth it depending on the family situation, but if it’s about the expectation of control, as it seems it might be, then it’s worth setting the boundaries right then and there.
If FIL’s concern is for the well-being and safety of his grandchild, then ask him to explain how cutting off ties with the family isn’t detrimental to the child. Either he’ll come to his senses or might make it more clear that it’s less about the child and more about control and seniority between him and your family, at which point you can discuss that directly.
That’s way off topic, though.