Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | dodger-dog's commentslogin

The Republicans continue to honor the democratic republic, but when the democrats and socialist get in power, they want to get rid of it.

https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/the-violent-exhaustion...


The democrats have been screaming about constitutional this and that, then when the DSA playbook is released calling for the removal of the senate its all silence. shrug. We're screwed either way we go at this point.


Today's librarians are the ultimate gatekeepers working for publishers and corporate content creators. I'm not sure I know of a group that hates AI more. Most of them would have you borrowing PDFs to read. Lawmakers are going to move that way. The guardrails will not be put in place to protect jobs, they will be put in place to protect profits and power.

I have a friend who came out of his house to shoot and kill a guy who was inside his car attempting to steal it. Friend was literally a local celebrity for months.


So what happened? Was there a legal judgment? Did he get legal advice? Did local newspapers commission and publish legal analyses?

(Did this happen in Texas?)


Yeah, what happened?

Shooting someone inside a car will undoubtedly make a mess! Did he drag the thief out of the car ASAP afterwards, did the guy run off, or what?

My actions would likely depend on how fond I was of the car:

New Tesla - try talking the guy out of the car,

1971 (maybe any year) Volvo wagon - shoot him dead, etc.


Of course the public relations is all spin. Corporations do not have feelings. Individual managers may feel one way or the other. It is likely those feelings are highly rationalized by how the change affects them individually. Will they make more money? Will they take on added duties without an increase in money?

Some may wax la philosophie politique at times, but we tend to do that in the abstract when things are at an arms length.

At the end of the day, people made a choice between a corporation and a narrow group of stakeholders over employees and the downstream community influence of their buying power, likely a large group and certainly a different group.

You could argue in the long run it is better for society for companies to make these decisions, and many times that may actually be the case. But, in this one instance, when you place it all on the scales, they were not doing it to save a company or make its products and services more competitive in the market. There was nothing "existential" about it. They wanted to go from one profit level to a higher profit level for a certain group, and that is just what they did.


You boot tails to track your period?


"On appeal, his insurance agreed to cover $9,967 of the charge—better than nothing, but it still left him on the hook for about $3,000."

Tell the insurance company to wait to release the funds until you talk to the ambulance company or to release the funds directly to you.

Tell the ambulance company they can take the $9,967 or get zero.


This isn't sustainable. You really want every person who is dealing with this bureaucracy to manage negotiating between their insurance and their EMS? After they've just had a significant accident/health issue?

That seems needlessly cruel to do to people.


Have you ever even Honey-Crisped, Bro?


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: