Are you going to care for the unwanted babies that now get born? Are you going to pay for their upbringing?
I suspect not but you will happily force others to do just that.
Readit Newsdigsy commented on The Contractual Impossibility of Unwinding Disney’s Reedy Creek news.bloombergtax.com/tax... · Posted by u/Isamu
I think that there is a feeling that the other side is attempting to move policy forward that is not supported by a majority of constituents but is rather leveraging an artificial amplification on media (social and otherwise) to make it appear otherwise and, as such, is a blatant, clear, and obvious subversion of process. I think that that feeling, whether right or wrong, is used to justify taking the gloves off.
>I think that there is a feeling that the other side is attempting to move policy forward
Which policy?
Well obviously Disney got a plum deal back in the day, which should probably be migrated to fairer terms now.
OTOH, watching the video, this politician is total disingenuous slime, I'm a bit angry just listening to him, and I'm not from Miami, or even America.
>should probably be migrated to fairer terms now.
Maybe so.
But this wasnt a re-negotiation. This was payback for Disney pausing donations to Republican politicians.
I have not been following the story as closely as others, but how is reversing special privileges for a corporate titan (Disney), that give it abilities that nobody else is allowed to have, authoritarianism? That only seems authoritarian relative to anarcho capitalism or extreme libertarianism.
There are 1800+ special districts in Florida.
Special priviledges are hardly limited to Disney.
This whole thing just makes no sense from a business perspective. Who would want this? Who would pay money for this? It just seems like it's an idea that some executive got, and no one was willing to tell them that it sounds like a horrible idea until it went too far and it collapsed. Did they do any marketing research or even a gut check? This seems pretty normal for the type of companies that just hire McKinssey for strategy and neglect and sanity checks.
The average age of CNN watchers is over 60 years old, not exactly a prime streaming demographic. But who would want to pay for the news monthly for a streaming service? Newspapers have enough trouble getting people to pay a bit for text. CNN needs to compete with other streaming services, and all of the free streams out there and podcasts (which are typically higher quality than CNN ).
It's all baffling.
I paid for it.
I figured I would get CNN light for $3 a month vs Sling for $30 (which I only use for CNN now).
>The average age of CNN watchers is over 60 years old, not exactly a prime streaming demographic.
Isnt it? Every 60 year old I know has some kind of streaming device and social media accounts.
digsy commented on Sex and gender education banned for K-3 in Florida flgov.com/2022/03/28/gove... · Posted by u/physicsfox
All right, I guess I'll spend some karma. Unless there's an aspect of this I'm not aware of, I don't think this is so bad.
I went to a very good public school in the US, and we didn't have sex education until 4th grade, and even then I think we were a bit immature for it at the time. They were still only doing the _very_ basics and I remember the class not being well behaved during it. I think sex education any younger than that is totally unnecessary and kind of inappropriate.
I find it pretty weird that American politics has become really obsessed with the sexual topics around little kids lately.
The bill was written to ban discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity for any age - not just K-3.
> Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards.
http://laws.flrules.org/2022/22
The rationale for the law is also seriously suspect - https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/06/politics/fact-check-desantis-...
Simply put, this law is a solution looking for a problem and being pushed by a politician seeking reelection and ultimately - the presidency.
digsy commented on Plaid is an evil nightmare product from Security Hell drewdevault.com/2022/02/1... · Posted by u/TangerineDream
The article describes how Plaid is designed to replace the micro deposit / verify flow used by many sites to validate that you own a checking account before they deposit/withdrawal to/from that account.
I’m sure this is a reasonably common flow, but it’s only a slice of what Plaid does. They additionally do transaction parsing/normalization across a wide variety of accounts. I’ve been using Plaid for years as part of my ledger-cli workflow, to automate importing of account transactions.
The security flow is horrible, but the security flow for banks was already horrible: the reason I trust banks with my money is because of strong ability to reverse malicious activity, and regulatory oversight, not because I trust their infosec practices.
Pre-Plaid, I had some local scraping tools to pull transactions, and ran into several instances where the “MFA” step for banks allowed my “browser” to pick its own unique identifier. If I set it to “hahalol”, that was fine, and as long as I kept sending that ID, I never had to MFA again.
If we somehow had a world where there was an actual standard way to fetch data from my banks, I’d love that. I’d switch immediately. But in the current world, Plaid is pretty far down my list of financial-service-related risks.
>the security flow for banks was already horrible
I'm curious why you would say that.
What flaws have you seen in currently banking systems?
Deleted Comment
digsy commented on Fake vaccine cards are everywhere. It’s a public health nightmare grid.news/story/science/2... · Posted by u/treycopeland
Flu shots have been around for years, and by now people understand that the effectiveness greatly varies each year, but never being anywhere close to 100%.
COVID19 vaccines, on the other hand, were (contrary to today's frantic efforts to pretend otherwise) always sold as being a) >90% protection and b) ending the pandemic once enough people were vaccinated.
They were sold as >90% effective when introduced.
But it was made abundantly clear that the original vaccines were less effective against newer strains.
As an adopted child born prior to Roe v. Wade (and likely would not have been born post Roe v. Wade), I can assure you there are people who will gladly pay for the right to bring up and love a child.
Also as an adoptive parent, post Roe v. Wade, I can assure you there are people who will gladly pay for the right to bring up and love a child.
Also as a person who knows many people who cannot conceive children, including same sex couples, I can assure you that there are people who will gladly pay for the right to bring up and love a child.
I’m pro-choice, but no offense, you need to drop that argument. It makes an assumption that other people share your attitude about raising children who are not biologically your own. Many of us out there who realize that simply having shared biology may be the least important thing between a parent and a child.
No, it makes the argument that the people forcing women to give birth are not also willing to care for them.
And you didnt say that you personally would adopt all of these forced births so you made my point.