"Turns out, the it has been exaggerating. According to BuzzFeed News, which obtained leaked documents, drivers in some markets don't take home much more than service workers at major chains like Walmart when it comes to net pay."
Cue the "I'm shocked" posts.
Wow, could believe that a fine upstanding company like Uber would fib about something like the pay rate of their slaves, err, I mean their "independently-contracted-not-an-employee-drivers"
So, basically, the lawyers get a fee of millions, but they have made it so hard to actually register for the fifty-five dollar rebate that pretty much all the users will get: zero.
Yep. That's the way virtually all of these class action lawsuits work. The lawyers make millions and the victims get some shitty coupon for a free car wash or basket-weaving class.
The car wash is only valid on alternate Tuesdays from 2am to 3am in months that end in "S", and the basket-weaving class requires you to travel to Namibia twice a week.
It's exceedingly unlikely that a guy with a glass bottle or a knife would kill 49 people before being stopped.
No, not really. The Station nightclub fire killed 21, and that was a half-hearted attempt. If the person had used fire bombs the death toll would have been much, much higher. You'd be surprised just how fatal it is to be covered in flaming gasoline or in a room that's been doused in gas and set on fire.
You're right, drug laws really work great, that's why there is no illegal drug use in this country,
-
Why have laws against theft? Criminals aren't gonna obey them.
They exist to provide punishment and revenue, like almost any law. And to stop people from breaking that law again, by locking them up. Yes, a small percentage of people may decide not to do something because of a law, but in general they don't really change people's behavior all that much.
-
Why have laws against murder? It won't generally deter criminals.
Tell me, do you refrain from murdering people because it's wrong, or because there's a law against it?
You might not have noticed, but all four gun control bills that came up yesterday in the Senate were blocked.
Even if they had all passed they still wouldn't have stopped this guy. All the gun laws in the world wouldn't have stopped him because he wasn't doing anything illegal, right up until the moment he did. No law can stop someone from changing their mind, or worse, from snapping and going apeshit one day.
He couldn't be stopped because he wasn't doing anything criminal, right up until the moment he did. This is part of the folly of gun laws. They don't stop people from deciding to commit a criminal act- there is simply no way to do such a thing.
If every firearm in the US were outlawed and he was unable to get or make one (unlikely, but let's pretend), maybe he'd have taken a few glass bottles filled with gas into the nightclub and firebombed it. What's the next step: outlawing glass bottles and gasoline?
Laws (any law) only affect people who are predisposed to follow a law, laws generally don't deter criminals.
Yay! More surveillance, who couldn't be super-duper happy about that? Remember, citizens, it's for our own good and it will never be used for anything bad, okay? Alrighty then, carry on!
? The only argument I have heard is that insurance companies might charge more, and employers may be reluctant to hire people with bad health.
Note that the first is illegal under the ACA, and the second is likely either illegal or actionable under the ADA.
Yeah....if you can prove it, and I mean really, really prove it. They'll never come right out and say, Ewww, let's not hire the sick guy!", no, it'll be that you're "unqualified" or "over-qualified" or something else. You'll never get proof of the real reason they did hire you.
Errr, yes. Unless you're the only person in the world with your name (or a similar name) AND you don't think you have to worry about accidentally being mistaken for another patient OR you think that data entry people never make a mistakes and mix up or link your records with those of someone else, then, no, have a ball!
Of course, if your records have mistakes in them or later it's found out that you may be statistically likely to develop some expensive condition based on an analysis of your currently innocuous medical history, then you might want to rethink that whole, "I'm healthy, let 'em see my info" plan.
And finally, being healthy is a temporary condition at best. If you do get sick and you somehow manage to remove your records from the cloud (ha ha, good luck!) the sudden disappearance of your online medical records may in itself trigger a "Whoah, what's this guy got to hide?" response by the insurance companies. But don't worry, because you're healthy (today anyway).
Arbitration is not evil. It reduces costs and overhead for both parties.
Yes, when it's done fairly, but quite often it's not done fairly. Oftentimes the arbitrator tends to side with whoever is paying them so as not to endanger his/her future earnings. This isn't exactly a secret. Arbitrators function more like advocates for whoever signs their check, and if they rule against their employer too often then they're let go.
If you went to arbitration with Mastercard, for example, and the arbitrator was paid by Mastercard and Mastercard was his sole source of income, how fair of a hearing do you think you'd really get? How often would you be able to rule against your boss and cost him money before he decided to no longer use your services?
Now that we've signed you up for a cellphone plan by promising you stuff, we're discontinuing the thing that made you sign up. Why? Because fuck you! ha ha ha!
Slashdot Mirror
I solved this by just removing the fan from my computer, and I r$7mend* th(sssss solu#on fssst - jfha^fk lif4gkmv6n-3g ssssssssss
You mean like free speech zones?
Exactly. You don't want that free speech to be bandied about just anywhere, do ya? Best to keep it corralled in a safe place.
Why bother having a 4th Amendment at all if it doesn't apply to the things you own and store information on?
Soon they'll decide that the 1st Amendment is a pain in the ass and make it conditional.
"Turns out, the it has been exaggerating. According to BuzzFeed News, which obtained leaked documents, drivers in some markets don't take home much more than service workers at major chains like Walmart when it comes to net pay."
Cue the "I'm shocked" posts.
Wow, could believe that a fine upstanding company like Uber would fib about something like the pay rate of their slaves, err, I mean their "independently-contracted-not-an-employee-drivers"
So, basically, the lawyers get a fee of millions, but they have made it so hard to actually register for the fifty-five dollar rebate that pretty much all the users will get: zero.
Yep. That's the way virtually all of these class action lawsuits work. The lawyers make millions and the victims get some shitty coupon for a free car wash or basket-weaving class.
The car wash is only valid on alternate Tuesdays from 2am to 3am in months that end in "S", and the basket-weaving class requires you to travel to Namibia twice a week.
And you seem to think that using a gun or using firebombs are of equal ease to be in the position to do the killing, which is clearly not the case...
No, that's not at all what I said, so please stop putting words in my mouth.
It's exceedingly unlikely that a guy with a glass bottle or a knife would kill 49 people before being stopped.
No, not really. The Station nightclub fire killed 21, and that was a half-hearted attempt. If the person had used fire bombs the death toll would have been much, much higher. You'd be surprised just how fatal it is to be covered in flaming gasoline or in a room that's been doused in gas and set on fire.
So, laws don't generally deter criminals?
Yes, that is correct.
-
Then why have drug laws? They don't work.
You're right, drug laws really work great, that's why there is no illegal drug use in this country,
-
Why have laws against theft? Criminals aren't gonna obey them.
They exist to provide punishment and revenue, like almost any law. And to stop people from breaking that law again, by locking them up. Yes, a small percentage of people may decide not to do something because of a law, but in general they don't really change people's behavior all that much.
-
Why have laws against murder? It won't generally deter criminals.
Tell me, do you refrain from murdering people because it's wrong, or because there's a law against it?
What? You mean politicians are trying to pass/block laws that wouldn't really affect anything? Merely for soundbites? DURING AN ELECTION YEAR?
Lol, shocking, isn't it? But don't worry, the NEXT set of laws we come up with, they'll really work, fer sure, we promise!
You might not have noticed, but all four gun control bills that came up yesterday in the Senate were blocked.
Even if they had all passed they still wouldn't have stopped this guy. All the gun laws in the world wouldn't have stopped him because he wasn't doing anything illegal, right up until the moment he did. No law can stop someone from changing their mind, or worse, from snapping and going apeshit one day.
You're right.
He couldn't be stopped because he wasn't doing anything criminal, right up until the moment he did. This is part of the folly of gun laws. They don't stop people from deciding to commit a criminal act- there is simply no way to do such a thing.
If every firearm in the US were outlawed and he was unable to get or make one (unlikely, but let's pretend), maybe he'd have taken a few glass bottles filled with gas into the nightclub and firebombed it. What's the next step: outlawing glass bottles and gasoline?
Laws (any law) only affect people who are predisposed to follow a law, laws generally don't deter criminals.
Yay! More surveillance, who couldn't be super-duper happy about that? Remember, citizens, it's for our own good and it will never be used for anything bad, okay? Alrighty then, carry on!
The Pirate Bay didn't host any copyrighted material either, but they still lost in court.
If you can't see the difference between what Cloudflare does and what the Pirate Bay does then you should change your name to "currently_ignorant".
Lol, I have a better chance of becoming president than Gary Johnson does.
Hell, my dog has a better chance, and I don't even own a dog.
Because Cloudflare isn't hosting the infringing material, duh.
Note that the first is illegal under the ACA, and the second is likely either illegal or actionable under the ADA.
Yeah....if you can prove it, and I mean really, really prove it. They'll never come right out and say, Ewww, let's not hire the sick guy!", no, it'll be that you're "unqualified" or "over-qualified" or something else. You'll never get proof of the real reason they did hire you.
Is there some downside that I am overlooking?
Errr, yes. Unless you're the only person in the world with your name (or a similar name) AND you don't think you have to worry about accidentally being mistaken for another patient OR you think that data entry people never make a mistakes and mix up or link your records with those of someone else, then, no, have a ball!
Of course, if your records have mistakes in them or later it's found out that you may be statistically likely to develop some expensive condition based on an analysis of your currently innocuous medical history, then you might want to rethink that whole, "I'm healthy, let 'em see my info" plan.
And finally, being healthy is a temporary condition at best. If you do get sick and you somehow manage to remove your records from the cloud (ha ha, good luck!) the sudden disappearance of your online medical records may in itself trigger a "Whoah, what's this guy got to hide?" response by the insurance companies. But don't worry, because you're healthy (today anyway).
"Should You Store Medical Details In The Cloud?"
The answer is "No".
For more information on email scams, please click the link below and when the dialog box appears, click "Run".
Arbitration is not evil. It reduces costs and overhead for both parties.
Yes, when it's done fairly, but quite often it's not done fairly. Oftentimes the arbitrator tends to side with whoever is paying them so as not to endanger his/her future earnings. This isn't exactly a secret. Arbitrators function more like advocates for whoever signs their check, and if they rule against their employer too often then they're let go.
If you went to arbitration with Mastercard, for example, and the arbitrator was paid by Mastercard and Mastercard was his sole source of income, how fair of a hearing do you think you'd really get? How often would you be able to rule against your boss and cost him money before he decided to no longer use your services?
"To take advantage of our 'Don't Be Evil' clause, please click the 'I agree to binding arbitration' checkbox."
They found 138 security gaps? So apparently they only tested 138 sites. :)
This is like dipping a cup in the ocean 10 times and reporting that you "found 10 cups of water in the ocean".
Apparently it doesn't have to be sustainable. They got the word out, the promotion worked, and now nobody has to give away any more pizzas.
Exactly.
Earlier: "Hey kids, want some free stuff? Sign here!"
Now: Hey kids, remember that free stuff we promised you? Well, you're not going to get it, ha ha ha!"
Eat two or three pieces of pizza, not the whole goddamed pie,
It's these kind of authoritarian restrictions that makes me hate America.
Now that we've signed you up for a cellphone plan by promising you stuff, we're discontinuing the thing that made you sign up. Why? Because fuck you! ha ha ha!