Well, Uber should have enough insurance to meet or exceed common standards where it operates. In the states, they greatly exceed common insurance coverage: even the high coverage of $250,000 in some states for taxis is dwarfed by Uber's $1,000,000 coverage. If German taxis have a higher coverage level, Uber should supply at least that.
Again, arguments against Uber in America often include the lack of insurance coverage--which, in America, is simply untrue. Uber has you better covered in America than an actual commercial taxi service. I don't know about Germany, but I had assumed everyone was similarly uninformed--notably, mainly English-speaking Americans and Britons appear to be commenting, rather than anyone who is able or likely to read up on German Uber and determine if its coverage is adequate. The safe assumption seemed that Uber would be similarly covered in Germany, but perhaps not.
How do you expect to screencap your Twitter feed, Mr. Anderson, when you're not logged in?
The screencap shows she captured the whole event immediately upon its completion, while not logged in. Also, it shows the account was created for the purpose of this event. How did Anita get logged out? Why did she capture this account page in a screenshot, and not a capture of her feed with the slew of threatening messages?
I was given the explanation that Anita must have a friend who looks out for this, and saw it, and told her; and that Anita probably uses an application, rather than logging into Twitter, or uses two accounts and is often logged out while switching; and so Anita would have found out about this through her friend, immediately, and gone, not logged in because she's never logged in, and screen capped.
That still relies on said friend discovering this immediately, and then relaying quickly. It also puts in a whole lot of wild conjecture about how the screen capturing person became logged out.
It's driving me nuts, because everyone has taken the word of a sham as gospel, and now we're seeing a big flurry of activity around this shit. I believe the appropriate punishment for con artists who knowingly lie and manipulate others to benefit themselves is crucifixion.
Currently, there's an ionized water seller trying to sell people a $3000 machine at the market here, talking about how their ionized water has an alkaline balance and changes the pH of your body to boost your immune system and remove toxins--all of which has been debunked by science decades ago. There was also a person explaining how the hydrogen ions in a $30 wrist band he was selling create magnetic vibrations that boost the energy levels and power of your body.
It shows the account was specifically created for this, posted everything in 3 minutes, and was discovered and screencapped 12 seconds later without being logged in or doing a search. In other words: whosoever took the screencap knew about this the moment it was done.
She somehow noticed the threats without being logged in, and captured the twitter feed within 13 seconds of the final post. The whole affair was a rapid-fire set of shifting crazy-talk across three minutes. It looks like manufactured evidence, and all explanations to the contrary are wild stretches.
It means if someone runs a traffic control signal illegally and smashes into your car, causing $4 million in damages, and they're insured for $30k, your insurance company accepts the $30k and automatically waives your rights to further compensation. "Payment in full". Full payment. Payment for everything, agreed and settled.
Actually it's very adequate: by accepting the payout, you accept it as payment in full. Typically, the not-at-fault driver is insured, and their insurance company accepts the payout on their behalf, waiving all further claims; while an uninsured motorist has no legal standing. An insured pedestrian will, as well, accept the claim via insurance company, automatically, and then have the rest covered by their own insurance.
It's communism: central economic planning. In this case, he's trying to legislate how shipping and stocking for risk management is handled.
This means, of course, overstocked phones, meaning waste stock, meaning additional cost shifted onto the consumer in the form of higher prices. Communism would, as well, legislate that away, mandating that the business simply incur less profit.
Americans have been favoring communism lately, in the form of demanding the government tell businesses to profit less. We have also shifted a lot toward democratic socialism, demanding the Government provide more services; mind, we haven't moved toward true socialism, in which the Government runs a business for a profit and uses that money for social benefit, so we're just asking for higher taxes or deficit spending.
I've been trying to build this web site about providing a Citizen's Dividend--a Georgist concept--taken as a percentage of "the economy" by applying a flat tax against all income filed, but it's too ugly to publicize yet. My plan is, in a nutshell, to eliminate all taxes tied to direct welfare spending totaling $1.62T (excluding Medicare and Medicaid, due to practical concerns); apply a 14.5% tax to all income instead ($1.72T); divide that up by all natural-born, resident American citizens of the age of majority ($7,125 per adult person per year in 2012); and repeal minimum wage. Because it's a fixed tax on all income filed, it follows inflation forever.
There's some transition required--this works if you've been doing it for 10 years, but breaks if you're on Social Security today collecting $1500/mo and we suddenly give you $600/mo instead--but the end result is a baseline market in which people have a known, non-garnered, non-taxed, permanent income to which all other income is added. It's just enough for businesses to turn a profit by providing basic needs, even in a recession (2007 - 4.8% GDP drop, would drop income by 0.7% or $28/mo), and is the amount that the unemployed or minimally-employed are guaranteed to have. This makes it safe for the market to solve our problems of homelessness and hunger with impunity, for the higher purpose of raking in tons of cash from people who have nothing and are desperate enough to give up everything they do have. No government intervention required, poverty solves itself.
The whole thing is both blindingly simple and immensely complex. The rough outline--the actual action required and the major effects--are simple, easy, and obvious. The secondary effects, the self-stabilizing nature of the thing, the threats and resistances to those threats, are all results of subtle complexity in social and economic behavior.
No government planning in how the economy should provide welfare. No government welfare services. No government enterprise to raise welfare revenue (unemployment is this: a government insurance provider). A tax object is created, it exhibits fixed behavior, and the market adjusts around that to all fluctuations in market conditions. It's like I've found a way to make capitalism work.
Yes. Here, Uber's coverage is above and beyond commercial taxi service coverage requirements, and well beyond what's common. I have no numbers for Germany; I can only comment on their American business practices. Notably, people have been repeating in New York and Utah and all over America that Uber drivers do not have insurance, which, as I've demonstrated, is incorrect; I have assumed everyone else in the world with similar arguments are similarly misinformed--which is an appropriate assumption until otherwise demonstrated.
Trying to predict the future gets you sent to the third circle of Hell, where your head is turned 180 degrees and you're forced to walk backwards for all eternity.
What bothers me is: are these the same climate researchers who constantly sensationalize the magnitude and effects of climate change, and then come out and tell us they were lying because they didn't think we'd handle the truth being 10 times worse, and then "leak" sensationalized committee conclusions about how climate change has caused "irreversible damage" and "cannot be stopped" and tell us that they didn't mean for us to see that?
I won't be surprised when they leak that our climate change is threatening tourism for extra-terrestrials, who have threatened to annihilate human life if we don't correct it, and then come out and say, "That wasn't supposed to come out in public! We didn't want to say it's aliens, but... it's aliens."
The entire community of climate change science is filled with liars and bullshit who keep getting caught being liars spouting bullshit. I saw a report recently showing miles of Maryland coastal roads under 4 inches of water, claiming rising sea levels have started to draw the ocean inland and shrunk the coastline 20 miles back already, forcing people to abandon their homes and move to higher ground. Not "2 feet in the next century," not "Tropical Storm damage," no. They said the ice caps have already melted enough to put part of the state underwater, and that Maryland will be gone in 10 years.
So when some scientists pull something they magically found in a warehouse somewhere out of their ass, it bothers me.
I'm required to have at least $30k for property damage and $30k for medical liability. I have $100/$100/$300, but have considered going to a $300 total coverage model.
No. And the only relevant one seems to be Plummer v. State, which has been overruled as of late--circa 2008, the courts in Texas ruled self defense against an arrest is unlawful even if the arrest is lawful. That means you must submit to all police abuse.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, Uber should have enough insurance to meet or exceed common standards where it operates. In the states, they greatly exceed common insurance coverage: even the high coverage of $250,000 in some states for taxis is dwarfed by Uber's $1,000,000 coverage. If German taxis have a higher coverage level, Uber should supply at least that.
Again, arguments against Uber in America often include the lack of insurance coverage--which, in America, is simply untrue. Uber has you better covered in America than an actual commercial taxi service. I don't know about Germany, but I had assumed everyone was similarly uninformed--notably, mainly English-speaking Americans and Britons appear to be commenting, rather than anyone who is able or likely to read up on German Uber and determine if its coverage is adequate. The safe assumption seemed that Uber would be similarly covered in Germany, but perhaps not.
How do you expect to screencap your Twitter feed, Mr. Anderson, when you're not logged in?
The screencap shows she captured the whole event immediately upon its completion, while not logged in. Also, it shows the account was created for the purpose of this event. How did Anita get logged out? Why did she capture this account page in a screenshot, and not a capture of her feed with the slew of threatening messages?
I was given the explanation that Anita must have a friend who looks out for this, and saw it, and told her; and that Anita probably uses an application, rather than logging into Twitter, or uses two accounts and is often logged out while switching; and so Anita would have found out about this through her friend, immediately, and gone, not logged in because she's never logged in, and screen capped.
That still relies on said friend discovering this immediately, and then relaying quickly. It also puts in a whole lot of wild conjecture about how the screen capturing person became logged out.
It's driving me nuts, because everyone has taken the word of a sham as gospel, and now we're seeing a big flurry of activity around this shit. I believe the appropriate punishment for con artists who knowingly lie and manipulate others to benefit themselves is crucifixion.
Currently, there's an ionized water seller trying to sell people a $3000 machine at the market here, talking about how their ionized water has an alkaline balance and changes the pH of your body to boost your immune system and remove toxins--all of which has been debunked by science decades ago. There was also a person explaining how the hydrogen ions in a $30 wrist band he was selling create magnetic vibrations that boost the energy levels and power of your body.
Nail these people to a tree.
It shows the account was specifically created for this, posted everything in 3 minutes, and was discovered and screencapped 12 seconds later without being logged in or doing a search. In other words: whosoever took the screencap knew about this the moment it was done.
It doesn't. It encourages you to die and decrease the surplus population; that's a more economical solution.
It's not; it's a technicality that allows us to have lower insurance.
Misread the thread. I was targeting the ones about Anita.
Threats to rape her?
Criminal behavior.
We've already talked about Anita's death and rape threats.
The reason people hate Anita Sarkeezian is not because she is a woman, but because she purposefully misrepresents facts
What do you mean, Anita misrepresents facts?
Evidence.
Well, here's some evidence about Anita.
They're talking about this.
After magically finding a rape threat 13 seconds after it went down, while not logged into Twitter, we believe every implausible lie out of this woman's mouth.
She somehow noticed the threats without being logged in, and captured the twitter feed within 13 seconds of the final post. The whole affair was a rapid-fire set of shifting crazy-talk across three minutes. It looks like manufactured evidence, and all explanations to the contrary are wild stretches.
It means if someone runs a traffic control signal illegally and smashes into your car, causing $4 million in damages, and they're insured for $30k, your insurance company accepts the $30k and automatically waives your rights to further compensation. "Payment in full". Full payment. Payment for everything, agreed and settled.
Actually it's very adequate: by accepting the payout, you accept it as payment in full. Typically, the not-at-fault driver is insured, and their insurance company accepts the payout on their behalf, waiving all further claims; while an uninsured motorist has no legal standing. An insured pedestrian will, as well, accept the claim via insurance company, automatically, and then have the rest covered by their own insurance.
Technically correct.
It's communism: central economic planning. In this case, he's trying to legislate how shipping and stocking for risk management is handled.
This means, of course, overstocked phones, meaning waste stock, meaning additional cost shifted onto the consumer in the form of higher prices. Communism would, as well, legislate that away, mandating that the business simply incur less profit.
Americans have been favoring communism lately, in the form of demanding the government tell businesses to profit less. We have also shifted a lot toward democratic socialism, demanding the Government provide more services; mind, we haven't moved toward true socialism, in which the Government runs a business for a profit and uses that money for social benefit, so we're just asking for higher taxes or deficit spending.
I've been trying to build this web site about providing a Citizen's Dividend--a Georgist concept--taken as a percentage of "the economy" by applying a flat tax against all income filed, but it's too ugly to publicize yet. My plan is, in a nutshell, to eliminate all taxes tied to direct welfare spending totaling $1.62T (excluding Medicare and Medicaid, due to practical concerns); apply a 14.5% tax to all income instead ($1.72T); divide that up by all natural-born, resident American citizens of the age of majority ($7,125 per adult person per year in 2012); and repeal minimum wage. Because it's a fixed tax on all income filed, it follows inflation forever.
There's some transition required--this works if you've been doing it for 10 years, but breaks if you're on Social Security today collecting $1500/mo and we suddenly give you $600/mo instead--but the end result is a baseline market in which people have a known, non-garnered, non-taxed, permanent income to which all other income is added. It's just enough for businesses to turn a profit by providing basic needs, even in a recession (2007 - 4.8% GDP drop, would drop income by 0.7% or $28/mo), and is the amount that the unemployed or minimally-employed are guaranteed to have. This makes it safe for the market to solve our problems of homelessness and hunger with impunity, for the higher purpose of raking in tons of cash from people who have nothing and are desperate enough to give up everything they do have. No government intervention required, poverty solves itself.
The whole thing is both blindingly simple and immensely complex. The rough outline--the actual action required and the major effects--are simple, easy, and obvious. The secondary effects, the self-stabilizing nature of the thing, the threats and resistances to those threats, are all results of subtle complexity in social and economic behavior.
No government planning in how the economy should provide welfare. No government welfare services. No government enterprise to raise welfare revenue (unemployment is this: a government insurance provider). A tax object is created, it exhibits fixed behavior, and the market adjusts around that to all fluctuations in market conditions. It's like I've found a way to make capitalism work.
Yes. Here, Uber's coverage is above and beyond commercial taxi service coverage requirements, and well beyond what's common. I have no numbers for Germany; I can only comment on their American business practices. Notably, people have been repeating in New York and Utah and all over America that Uber drivers do not have insurance, which, as I've demonstrated, is incorrect; I have assumed everyone else in the world with similar arguments are similarly misinformed--which is an appropriate assumption until otherwise demonstrated.
Trying to predict the future gets you sent to the third circle of Hell, where your head is turned 180 degrees and you're forced to walk backwards for all eternity.
What bothers me is: are these the same climate researchers who constantly sensationalize the magnitude and effects of climate change, and then come out and tell us they were lying because they didn't think we'd handle the truth being 10 times worse, and then "leak" sensationalized committee conclusions about how climate change has caused "irreversible damage" and "cannot be stopped" and tell us that they didn't mean for us to see that?
I won't be surprised when they leak that our climate change is threatening tourism for extra-terrestrials, who have threatened to annihilate human life if we don't correct it, and then come out and say, "That wasn't supposed to come out in public! We didn't want to say it's aliens, but... it's aliens."
The entire community of climate change science is filled with liars and bullshit who keep getting caught being liars spouting bullshit. I saw a report recently showing miles of Maryland coastal roads under 4 inches of water, claiming rising sea levels have started to draw the ocean inland and shrunk the coastline 20 miles back already, forcing people to abandon their homes and move to higher ground. Not "2 feet in the next century," not "Tropical Storm damage," no. They said the ice caps have already melted enough to put part of the state underwater, and that Maryland will be gone in 10 years.
So when some scientists pull something they magically found in a warehouse somewhere out of their ass, it bothers me.
I'm required to have at least $30k for property damage and $30k for medical liability. I have $100/$100/$300, but have considered going to a $300 total coverage model.
No. And the only relevant one seems to be Plummer v. State, which has been overruled as of late--circa 2008, the courts in Texas ruled self defense against an arrest is unlawful even if the arrest is lawful. That means you must submit to all police abuse.
Is it just me, or have we become a police state?
It's valid for US. I don't know what Uber supplies or what's valid in DE.
If you can read German, find the relevant information on UberDE and report back how many euros they cover.