edwhitesell

No issues on bills of two orgs I have access to. Cost Explorer shows data as it should too.

Very true. We went last year, happened to be on the day the Memphis Belle exhibit opened. We have videos of the WWII era planes flying overhead. Then they landed and we took a bus out to the end of the runway/taxiway and could get inside the planes. It was awesome.

In an amazing stroke of luck, one of the VC-25s was doing training that day too. So we have videos of the WWII planes flying by, then pan over to a VC-25 in the same shot. Just an amazing combination to see in the air at the same time.

Brutal is a nice way of putting it. I wouldn't wish it on anyone. I'm also fairly certain that I'd never do it again, but that's another story. Thanks for the kind words. My chemo ended about 2 years ago. I'm feeling pretty good now, other than the long-term/permanent side-effects.

I wouldn't be surprised to know that some oncologists put patients on meds to induce/increase appitite. But, from what I know of the chemo drugs I studied, anti-nausea is pretty much a given.

It may also be a factor for some who don't have much mass to lose and maintain a healthy weight. My oncologist kept up with me throughout the process and asked how I felt as it related to the weight-loss, red blood cell counts and all of those other blood tests. I probably could have gotten those meds too, if I asked. But, I was kinda against putting even more drugs in my body at that point.

I'm not sure abput appetite-inducing drugs, but depending on the type of chemo you're on you may get high doses of anti-nausea meds. I did. I still didn't want to eat, but I wasn't vomiting all the time.

I did 4 rounds of chemo, one round is a week (5 days) on, 2 weeks off. During the third round the nausea was so bad that I ate a piece of toast and drank some water. That week.

They try to get you to eat anything and everything so you have some strength. It's also a factor to flush the chemo drugs out of your body. Food and fluids help that too.

This is definitely good advice. Also, from my own experience with cancer that spread: get a second opinion from another oncologist (get a third if you feel the need). It's your body, it's your life, do your homework.

After all of that, do your follow-ups.

Oddly enough, I'm two years out of my initial diagnosis, sitting in the oncologist's waiting room for results of my latest scans as I write this.

I've used LegalZoom twice. Once for a corp, another for an LLC, it was easy both times. Other than that, I'd say it's helpful to have a good CPA.

> If you go to a high level of abstraction, you remove useful distinctions.

That's my point and what I was extrapolating from your high-level comment. If you're going to give an example, it's good to talk about things the gas station and software company do to reduce that income to, or below, zero. Things that can provide direct, positive, net gain impact on ownership of the corp. However, those same things are not available to employees of the corp.

To me, the rules should be the same for _any_ taxable entity.

At a high level of just considering taxable income that is true. However, the difference is there are a lot more things a corp can do to reduce taxable income than an individual can do. If you happen to be the owner of a corp you can also use those things to your individual benefit.

If the argument is to say "income is income", then "expenses are expenses" should apply too.

Edit: typo

We used Skype for Business until a few months ago and had a fair amount of issues. We switched our Office 365 accounts all over to Teams and everything has been working a lot better since.

For years AmEx has allowed recurring charges to continue after a number or expiration date change. But I'm pretty sure they don't share new information with the merchant as part of that.

It's nice after a stolen card number to know recurring charges will continue automatically.

Other discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19400691

Hmm, maybe I guess. It was all under the U-Verse brand at the time. I remember they offered something like a 150Mb download, but it was around $300/month.

In the past, the answer was sometimes. About 6 years ago I lived in a Dallas suburb where I had ATT fiber directly to my house. A friend a few miles away, in Dallas, had copper. We had the same services, same prices, same hardware, etc.

Of course, if you don't sign up, make sure you DO opt out of Informed Delivery. Otherwise someone else may sign up and get copies of all your mail sent to them without your knowledge.

Increasing cost was the thought, yes. I admit I'm not totally up-to-speed on what adblock and ublock do, but I was under the impression that they don't load the ads. So while you wouldn't see them, there's also no cost to serving them.

Edit: But are the advertisers really paying for those clicks? Reading through the thread, it seems like these get flagged as fraud pretty easily. So while there's still a cost to create/serve the ads, to the point of my question, it would seem they don't pay the websites for the clicks.

It seems the approach here is to reduce the click-data value to zero, because every ad is clicked. How about just removing clicks all together?

Maybe about a browser extension that loads every ad, but there are no clicks. Preferably the browser makes the ad un-clickable (if it's visible at all).

Now you've got advertisers spending money on creatives, building campaigns, bandwidth, monitoring/management, etc. but there's an almost zero chance of generating revenue. Would that be more effective?

Yep, I just renewed a bunch of domains and all privacy was free.

Mods- Can we get 2010 in the title please?

This is interesting. A friend and I talked about a similar idea about 10 years ago where we thought about buying gas stations that were going out of business to turn into mini data centers. These would have been the smaller, sometimes Mom & Pop places that were obsoleted as the larger Truck Stop looking stations moved in.

We thought already having underground fuel tanks and permits would be a meaningful start. Also, already being at or near major roadways, etc would make fiber access easier.

But, life got in the way and we never went anywhere with it.

That explains why the latest Ghostery update on Android was so terrible. It lost all of my tabs and had 3 different places to disable some form of tracking.

Shouldn't be too much. You can buy one [SG-1000] linked from pfsense that is only 2.5W (idle) draw.

Exactly. That's why, among many other things, transparency is important. I'd have no issue being on a list if I knew I was on it and had a process to get a fair decision to be removed.

However, that doesn't happen. So, we're stuck with an ineffective bureaucracy that is a waste of time, money and resources that labels itself "security".

Part of me (a small part) wants to be OK with this. Because, a person/business/organization should be able to maintain information on interactions with people where "issues" have occurred. Example: "Hey, if this guy comes into the restaurant, he tends to drink too much and cause trouble."

Unfortunately, the TSA's track-record with pretty much everything is terrible. So, I don't see anything good coming from it.

*edit: example in the first paragraph

> Before the TSA, didn't airports just have security screeners employed by the airport directly?

Yep. And in many cases, all of those "ineffective" security people were fired when TSA was created after 9/11. Then, in order to fill all of the openings, TSA hired them (with little to no training) and gave them raises. Source: I know a few who went through this process in a regional airport (Toledo Express, in Ohio).

Could be worse. I recently called my doctor for a refill on a prescription, left a message for the nurse. Before I received a call back, I got a text message from GoodRX with a link about the medication, following the link (I anonymized it) took me to a page about the medication and advertising about where I could get it for the best price.

Of course, this made no sense to me, as I deny sharing of my medical information with anyone. So I contacted the office, went through a couple of phone trees and spoke with a few different people. None of them could see the issue with what happened. Then I explained a phone number is PII, and tying it to a medication seemed like a significant HIPPA issue.

Then things changed, it took a few hours to hear the whole story where a pharmaceutical rep had apparently told the nurses/office staff about this great way to get prescription drug information to patents by simply entering the medication and the patient's phone number in an App...

I’ve been told this is rectified, but the reality is I wish there was more I could do. I can’t imagine how many patients have been affected by this and thought nothing of it.

There is an example available on the page linked to there.

It might, but it hasn't in the 18 months I've been using it. I don't know what the timer is supposed to be, but it seems like something less than 2 seconds. I'm pretty sure I couldn't get my phone in my pocket and press the power button that quickly if I wanted to.

Also, the case adds to the pressure needed to depress the button anyway.

Some Androids (like mine) won't lock for a few seconds after turning off the screen. It's a nice feature when you press to turn off the screen, and quickly realize you need to do something else. Just turn on the screen and it's still unlocked.

Entering the pattern after it's locked is pretty much impossible though.

Agreed, but I think vocal biometrics is a significantly more difficult problem to solve when even the best speech recognition still has issues like this.

Phonetics is hard. Especially with ambient noise, echo and such. I had a conversation with one of the speech engineers when I worked at a speech recognition company and the level of detailed problems to solve was impressive. Totally made sense after talking about it, but things I would not have thought about before.

I'd imagine the next thing to come in this area that would really make an improvement is an "on person" microphone. Maybe it's a pen in your pocket, or some kind of vibration detection (that could pick up the wearers voice), that would then allow some improvemnts in the domain of "who is talking" and how well the voice is processed.

Most phone now have some kind of lock screen, which makes it pretty difficult to get to the butt dialing stage. Will speech command recognition get to that stage?

The main reason I won't have any of those products in my house is because of that. I'd much rather have a confirmation of some kind before the system takes action.

"...random talking..."

Assistant "I am recording"

Me: "Stop recording"