According to https://inflationdata.com/, the CPI was in 207.342 in 2007 and 245.120 in 2017; that's an 18.22% increase over those 10 years, not the 100% you are claiming.
Late 1971 is 40.900 and late 2018 is 252.885, a multiplier of 6.175, making $200,000 then worth $1,235,000 today.
A dog named Blue? Somebody wrote a song about that!
Careful with that. I actually had a site refuse to accept my 4-letter answer for "pet's name" because it was too short (and therefore insecure, I guess?). Too bad for any unimaginative people naming their dog "Fido", or "Spot", or... "Blue".
Yes, that is data they have gleaned from your credit reports, and they are asking you to verify whether you are who you say you are. They already have the correct answers.
These are totally unrelated to security questions for which the user provides the answers, in order to secure account logins.
As others have noted, "they have the correct answers" is not always the case; that assumes there are no errors on your credit reports.
I tried to open an online banking account once, and had to answer these sorts of questions over the phone. I failed because I couldn't answer enough of the questions to their satisfaction. I later realized the problem:
A few years earlier I'd been conflated with someone else by one CR agency, apparently because that person had my SSN on one of his utility accounts. With extreme difficulty, I got the CR to correct that. But I realized that the troublesome questions were based on info about that other person; so then I was able to call the bank again and pass their test.
The video appears to be an April Fool's joke. The post is certainly off-topic. But have you seen it in a lot of other story discussions? If not, it's not spam.
"No recent revolving balances". Not really an issue of "not spending enough", as far as I can tell from Googling. If you have at least a few cards open, the complaint is you haven't put any spend on some of them for a while. Why that's considered bad I have no idea. So, same spend but distributed over all the cards would clear this up. Or, if you can close some unused ones and still maintain the other criteria, that's an option.
I hadn't realized this myself, and do in fact have 3 -- soon to be 4 -- no-AF mothballed cards. So I need to consider this myself.
Our company took over a floor and designed it to be an open floor plan for everyone below the program manager level. Even though I would have been allowed to work from home half the time, touring where I'd be working shortly definitely added weight to my early-retirement decision.
And to that list you could also add Sessions' rollback of various policies, and a lot of other things. I should have clarified that I was referring to his legislative efforts with Congress.
But none of the things you've listed strengthen the claim I was arguing against. It still looks to me that the Republicans and the bureaucracy are doing anything but resisting or trying to undermine. I'll even grant you a lonely example -- they are at least standing up to him on Russian sanctions.
The reason so little seems to get done is because Trump has focused almost entirely on health care. The Republican leadership -- and the vast majority of the Republicans in Congress -- have in fact supported him. So your statement makes no sense.
If they wanted to "depose" Trump it is very simple. There are already multiple credible arguments for drawing up Articles of Impeachment, and maybe for acting under Amendment 25. If they did so, Trump would be gone. Do you see a SINGLE Republican even hinting at the possibility of this? You do not.
I really don't see why the above summary says certain categories will pay more. The TPC article (yeah, yeah) shows negative numbers for ALL quintiles, with the top one of course having the by far largest %.
This, by the way, is one of the reasons why they were desperately trying to pass a "Health Care" bill which -- even with a giveaway to the rich of its own -- was intended to cost less so they had $ to balance against lost income here.
Note that the article says they used the same 10/25/35% brackets Trump proposed last fall. He did not specify the actual brackets and still hasn't. So this is somewhat speculative.
That said, anything with a lowered top rate, and the removal of the AMT and Inheritance Tax, will help the wealthy immensely. This is what we should be pushing back on.
How true. Fortunately, China's air and water never crosses its borders.
Oh, and any government or civil unrest caused by such problems never will either.
(Ok, maybe there's an implied/s in your post just as there is one in mine.)
I think you are saying that this was a contract where the client got to approve the specific people, not just the job/billing categories, that work on it? And the contract had no clause for agreeing on replacements if needed? Agreeing to such a contract is risky, and your company paid the price of doing so.
But I also have wonder: 3 of the 4 named people "quit within a month", and gave so little notice that they didn't stay up to that deadline? Either your company did a really crappy job of gauging their likelihood of staying before it nominated them, or they all had unexpected medical issues, or there was something unexpected and very bad about the client or the actual work. In the latter 2 cases at least the company could have room to work with the client on any needed contract mod.
Large companies can afford to keep paying employees that are not directly generating revenue. Usually they are either in training, or working on internal projects, both of which enable the company to improve what it can do for clients later.
Fidget spinners are the "pet rocks" of the 2000 era.
Pet rocks don't do anything, unless you put them in a sock and hit someone with them (My pet rock named Schleprock who slept in a tube sock?) but spinners are kinetic toys. They don't do anything by themselves either, but they're a hell of a lot more interesting than a pet rock. I'd say they're almost all the way up to gyroscope.:)
In fact, I'd say the gyroscopic effect is a part of what makes a fidget spinner interesting. To me, anyway.
(I know I'm a fidgeter, so I picked one up recently.)
It's really difficult to determine whether this would use the voicemail service of your provider, or the voicemail on your phone. I found a WaPo article https://www.washingtonpost.com... which quotes the RNC as saying it's the latter:
'"[D]irect-to-voicemail technology permits a voice message to go directly to the intended recipient’s mobile voicemail via a server-to-server communication, without a call being made to the recipient’s telephone number and without a charge," wrote the RNC.'
Note the "mobile voicemail".
Funny, but I have the opposite problem: I get lots of calls that ring, but when I answer there is nobody there. I assume these are mostly poorly programmed predictive dialers.
Poorly programmed only in the sense that they sometimes get more hits than they have available scammers to connect. So sometimes when you pick up you are denied the opportunity to waste their time. That disappoints me, anyway.
What makes you so sure it's legal? Cloudflare is arguing that it's not, and the odds are they've got better lawyers than you. Both Righthaven and Prenda did get into trouble on this point.
Or, they didn't ignore it and what they came up with through user testing just happens to not be something you personally like....
or you know, your preferences are law and fact I guess that could be it too.
Oh, it is certainly possible that they found users who felt the new design was more aesthetically pleasing, and felt that that was more important than usability.
Am I the only one who thinks Usability should be a key design principle?
No, you aren't. They've ignored it here, and they screwed it up even worse in the similar Google Voice redesign. Addition of unnecessary whitespace inevitably means the user has to do more work to get the same (useful) information.
Google Voice redesign decreased usability -- for no apparent reason -- in other ways as well, but that's probably off-topic here.
Slashdot Mirror
According to https://inflationdata.com/, the CPI was in 207.342 in 2007 and 245.120 in 2017; that's an 18.22% increase over those 10 years, not the 100% you are claiming.
Late 1971 is 40.900 and late 2018 is 252.885, a multiplier of 6.175, making $200,000 then worth $1,235,000 today.
No, because that is not a permanent ID. Every time you move to a new state, you get a new driver's license with a new number.
I came here to say that. Thank you.
Who the heck moderated this Funny?? It's an Informative important correction to the Summary!
A dog named Blue? Somebody wrote a song about that!
Careful with that. I actually had a site refuse to accept my 4-letter answer for "pet's name" because it was too short (and therefore insecure, I guess?). Too bad for any unimaginative people naming their dog "Fido", or "Spot", or ... "Blue".
Yes, that is data they have gleaned from your credit reports, and they are asking you to verify whether you are who you say you are. They already have the correct answers.
These are totally unrelated to security questions for which the user provides the answers, in order to secure account logins.
As others have noted, "they have the correct answers" is not always the case; that assumes there are no errors on your credit reports.
I tried to open an online banking account once, and had to answer these sorts of questions over the phone. I failed because I couldn't answer enough of the questions to their satisfaction. I later realized the problem: A few years earlier I'd been conflated with someone else by one CR agency, apparently because that person had my SSN on one of his utility accounts. With extreme difficulty, I got the CR to correct that. But I realized that the troublesome questions were based on info about that other person; so then I was able to call the bank again and pass their test.
The video appears to be an April Fool's joke. The post is certainly off-topic. But have you seen it in a lot of other story discussions? If not, it's not spam.
Can we expect to see this appearing as part of Captchas, then?
"No recent revolving balances". Not really an issue of "not spending enough", as far as I can tell from Googling. If you have at least a few cards open, the complaint is you haven't put any spend on some of them for a while. Why that's considered bad I have no idea. So, same spend but distributed over all the cards would clear this up. Or, if you can close some unused ones and still maintain the other criteria, that's an option.
I hadn't realized this myself, and do in fact have 3 -- soon to be 4 -- no-AF mothballed cards. So I need to consider this myself.
Our company took over a floor and designed it to be an open floor plan for everyone below the program manager level. Even though I would have been allowed to work from home half the time, touring where I'd be working shortly definitely added weight to my early-retirement decision.
And to that list you could also add Sessions' rollback of various policies, and a lot of other things. I should have clarified that I was referring to his legislative efforts with Congress. But none of the things you've listed strengthen the claim I was arguing against. It still looks to me that the Republicans and the bureaucracy are doing anything but resisting or trying to undermine. I'll even grant you a lonely example -- they are at least standing up to him on Russian sanctions.
The reason so little seems to get done is because Trump has focused almost entirely on health care. The Republican leadership -- and the vast majority of the Republicans in Congress -- have in fact supported him. So your statement makes no sense.
If they wanted to "depose" Trump it is very simple. There are already multiple credible arguments for drawing up Articles of Impeachment, and maybe for acting under Amendment 25. If they did so, Trump would be gone. Do you see a SINGLE Republican even hinting at the possibility of this? You do not.
I really don't see why the above summary says certain categories will pay more. The TPC article (yeah, yeah) shows negative numbers for ALL quintiles, with the top one of course having the by far largest %.
This, by the way, is one of the reasons why they were desperately trying to pass a "Health Care" bill which -- even with a giveaway to the rich of its own -- was intended to cost less so they had $ to balance against lost income here.
Note that the article says they used the same 10/25/35% brackets Trump proposed last fall. He did not specify the actual brackets and still hasn't. So this is somewhat speculative.
That said, anything with a lowered top rate, and the removal of the AMT and Inheritance Tax, will help the wealthy immensely. This is what we should be pushing back on.
How true. Fortunately, China's air and water never crosses its borders. Oh, and any government or civil unrest caused by such problems never will either. (Ok, maybe there's an implied /s in your post just as there is one in mine.)
"What you do" is not to defraud the client.
I think you are saying that this was a contract where the client got to approve the specific people, not just the job/billing categories, that work on it? And the contract had no clause for agreeing on replacements if needed? Agreeing to such a contract is risky, and your company paid the price of doing so.
But I also have wonder: 3 of the 4 named people "quit within a month", and gave so little notice that they didn't stay up to that deadline? Either your company did a really crappy job of gauging their likelihood of staying before it nominated them, or they all had unexpected medical issues, or there was something unexpected and very bad about the client or the actual work. In the latter 2 cases at least the company could have room to work with the client on any needed contract mod.
Large companies can afford to keep paying employees that are not directly generating revenue. Usually they are either in training, or working on internal projects, both of which enable the company to improve what it can do for clients later.
Fidget spinners are the "pet rocks" of the 2000 era.
Pet rocks don't do anything, unless you put them in a sock and hit someone with them (My pet rock named Schleprock who slept in a tube sock?) but spinners are kinetic toys. They don't do anything by themselves either, but they're a hell of a lot more interesting than a pet rock. I'd say they're almost all the way up to gyroscope. :)
In fact, I'd say the gyroscopic effect is a part of what makes a fidget spinner interesting. To me, anyway. (I know I'm a fidgeter, so I picked one up recently.)
"Nobody is denying that climate change is real."
Hahahahaha.
"Is our country still spending money on the GLOBAL WARMING HOAX?"
-Trump tweet on 25 Jan 2014
"Global warming is an expensive hoax"
- Trump tweet on 29 Jan 2014
"I don’t believe in climate change."
- Trump on CNN's New Day, 24 Sep 2015
It's really difficult to determine whether this would use the voicemail service of your provider, or the voicemail on your phone. I found a WaPo article https://www.washingtonpost.com... which quotes the RNC as saying it's the latter: '"[D]irect-to-voicemail technology permits a voice message to go directly to the intended recipient’s mobile voicemail via a server-to-server communication, without a call being made to the recipient’s telephone number and without a charge," wrote the RNC.' Note the "mobile voicemail".
Funny, but I have the opposite problem: I get lots of calls that ring, but when I answer there is nobody there. I assume these are mostly poorly programmed predictive dialers.
Poorly programmed only in the sense that they sometimes get more hits than they have available scammers to connect. So sometimes when you pick up you are denied the opportunity to waste their time. That disappoints me, anyway.
Well, this one has dual-sim and Android 7. How much that's worth of course depends on the buyer.
What makes you so sure it's legal? Cloudflare is arguing that it's not, and the odds are they've got better lawyers than you. Both Righthaven and Prenda did get into trouble on this point.
Well, he DID insult gays. Implying Trump is a gay insults gays the same way that implying Trump is a weasel insults weasels.
Or, they didn't ignore it and what they came up with through user testing just happens to not be something you personally like.... or you know, your preferences are law and fact I guess that could be it too.
Oh, it is certainly possible that they found users who felt the new design was more aesthetically pleasing, and felt that that was more important than usability.
Am I the only one who thinks Usability should be a key design principle?
No, you aren't. They've ignored it here, and they screwed it up even worse in the similar Google Voice redesign. Addition of unnecessary whitespace inevitably means the user has to do more work to get the same (useful) information. Google Voice redesign decreased usability -- for no apparent reason -- in other ways as well, but that's probably off-topic here.