I knows schools and businesses that bought these. Should have just bought normal 4k touchscreen displays with rolling stands. Then you can use whatever software you want on it. Could even run google's browser-based jamboard on the non-jamboard display.
A person with a few full magazines and a semiauto rifle in a crowded place, and not much concern about surviving, can kill dozens of people in a couple minutes before there's any chance of someone else with a gun being able to stop them. I'm not aware of someone doing this with a knife. Seems like it's always a gun. Probably because a gun makes it really easy to kill people quickly.
Yes, Athena is the serverless data querying alternative to BigQuery, not Redshift. When I used Athena for some large scale data querying just a couple years ago it was extremely slow, like two orders of magnitude slower than BigQuery for the same queries. And the UI, documentation, and just general user experience is nowhere near as good as BigQuery's. Nothing from AWS competes with BigQuery, it's genuinely a good product.
If Amazon's retail profit relies on allowing fraud and illegal activity to happen with their knowledge, that's just not something we should accept. Making more money for shareholders shouldn't happen at the expense of knowingly defrauding customers. The decision to not prevent fraud on Amazon just means the cost of dealing with that fraud is borne by the customers.
The USD and Euro are managed by central banks much better at monetary policy than random rich people trying to manipulate an asset market (like those for cryptocurrencies) because they have an untreated gambling addiction. The idea that US Dollars are less stable and reliable in terms of price trends over the long term than cryptocurrencies is just ridiculous. Small amounts of inflation is good for the economy. It incentivizes people to put their money stashes back into productive use, instead of just keeping it sealed in a box.
Prices reflect the maximum businesses think they can charge consumers without excessively reducing the demand, in order to maximize profits. If you give everyone money, they create stronger demand for products, and if the supply of those isn't increased (or even worse, is decreased), businesses can charge higher prices because the market will bear those higher prices because there is sufficiently high demand relative to supply. Inflation happens when businesses broadly raise prices. Broadly giving people more money can contribute to businesses finding that the market will bear higher prices because people now have more money.
There's also a lot of open area in the yards and air 10-30ft above single-family homes. There are lot of property owners who'd be willing to demolish the SFH on their lot and build a lowrise multi-unit building with 2-6 units, and the only thing stopping them is that it is illegal to do this.
A lot of jobs are in high cost of living areas. The reason they're high cost of living is because there are jobs there, the demand to live there is high, and they haven't built nearly enough housing. Some bay area municipalities have essentially not added any housing in the last 50 years. They made it illegal, because incumbent property owners don't want more people to be allowed to live there.
And it's not just the bay area. The populations of Cambridge and Boston have gone down since 1950, because a series of laws were passed that put tight restrictions on residential construction that reduced the allowed density and effectively made almost all of the existing housing stock illegal (but it was grandfathered in) and anything more dense than that, like even building a 5 story residential building in a lot zoned for 4 stories, when that lot is surrounded by 4 and 5 story buildings, is an expensive, long process of arguing with the zoning board and going through arbitrarily subjective design review processes.
Good to know, that is pretty useful for immediate transfers. I've done transfers between accounts at the same bank before, using their own website, and it still takes like 24 hours to leave 'pending' state.
Zelle isn't a bank, it's just a mechanism to communicate a transfer between two banks. The bank at either end of the transaction is regulated and must reverse fraudulent transactions. The fact that PNC is not reversing all of them means they just need to be subjected to additional legal process to enforce existing law.
It was pretty wild when I logged into one of my other bank accounts and it said I could not use Zelle with that account because I already had Zelle linked to a different bank account. So I had to unlink it from the other account first. Isn't it common for people to have more than one bank account, and wasn't this the case when Zelle was developed, relatively recently? Why did this use case not cross their mind when they developed it?
It's not reversible by Zelle, but it is reversible by the bank. Zelle is just an intermediary between banks. Some banks make it easier to get a fraudulent transaction fixed than others.
Is it true that if I had $50K in a bank, for the sake of example let's use Bank of America, and the bank just straight up loses my account and loses track of the fact that I had that money with them, FDIC does not ensure I get my money back? Would I just be reliant on the bank having good will towards me and giving me my money voluntarily? Is there any consumer protection that actually protects the consumer against business malpractice like this if FDIC doesn't?
Does Meta Pay have a checking account as part of each account that you can withdraw from directly via an ATM? Or does Meta Pay need to transfer the money into a 3rd party checking account that you can then withdraw from? That second step may not be instantaneous, depending on which bank the account is at.
Zelle transfers into an institutionally insured checking/savings account at a major financial institution are pretty safe and people will get their money back. Zelle transfers from non-BoA accounts will have the records at the other banks to prove the transfers existed and they can be recovered that way. If BoA really lost the records and don't have backups and people lost transfers from BoA to BoA accounts and neither BoA account has a record of the transaction, it will just be a hassle for customers probably having to fill out some forms and wait a while.
You can make an http web browser not store any cookies. This may limit the operation of some existing sites that rely on cookies though because they can't maintain client side session information or other state. Tracking cookies are not inherent to http. http is just the content transfer protocol. I feel like campaigning against tracking cookies within http, and advocating for http browsers to have more stringent handling of 3rd party cookies (like what Firefox offers, but maybe even more) is more likely to get wider adoption than coming up with a complete replacement for http.
I think we need to be at least open to the possibility that the current owner of privately held Twitter is an extraordinarily thin-skinned douchebag with the conflict management skills of a spoiled toddler, and a lengthy track record of petty ridiculous retaliation against people who suggest he is wrong about something or otherwise not the biggest genius in the world.
The average is not the only stat though, and doesn't tell everything. Even if it were true that FSD was safer than the average of human drivers, replacing some manually-steered cars with FSD cars could result in more pedestrians getting hit, depending on the breakdown within the two groups. The overall average isn't enough information and obscures the internal distribution of skill/safety within the overall population of drivers.
It matters who is driving what cars. If you're taking safe drivers and having them drive FSD cars, and comparing the average of that against the average of all non-FSD driven cars (which includes a lot of really shitty drivers in the average), then the net safety impact of this could be nothing. Introducing FSD cars would have no impact to overall car safety, and might even have a negative impact, if the FSD software is worse than the good drivers who are now not driving manually-steered cars but are driving FSD cars instead.
We need personal car size limits on city streets, stricter regulation about viewing angles and heights for personally licensed cars, and car mass taxes in general. Some of these SUVs should not be drivable with normal consumer vehicle licences. They should require a higher license level and training on driving large vehicles.
My guess is that it depends a lot on the driver. There are a lot of really reckless drivers, or really bad drivers out there on the roads right now. I know people who've been in several (relatively minor) car crashes, driving the same-ish sort of route to/from college and work that I was during the same period. I think they're just a bad driver. I feel like they're driving recklessly when I'm a passenger in a car they're driving. So a self-driving car might be a better driver than them, while also being worse than the median driver, and much much worse than like the upper portion of the human driver spectrum, like the 1st quintile of the 20% of human drivers who are pretty good.
Given how reckless some drivers are, I'd imagine the distribution of crashes among drivers is very skewed. I don't know numbers, but I'd expect to see something like 80% of car crashes involving (or objectively caused by) 20% of the drivers, with most car crashes involving people who have been involved in numerous crashes, and a large minority of drivers having been involved in zero car crashes.
Refusing to do assigned tasks despite knowing it will be a factor in your final assessment score is probably something valuable to measure as a factor in predicting your future success at tasks. I had some college courses where the homework was optional, but this is not that, this is courses where the homework is required, but not completed.
The opposite is true in my experience. I basically coasted through high school spending very little time on homework. I'd often spend hours, or even tens of hours, on single college assignments.
They're trying to determine how well you will do in courses in college. Surely how well you did in courses in high school is relevant. It is not sexist just because some groups tend to do better than others at a certain point in time. Girls have increased their academic success because they've historically not been encouraged to do so, but in recent decades they have. Girls in high school today are like 2nd (or 3rd) generation of women in the US to have been actually broadly encouraged to do well in school and obtain professional careers. There is an issue with boys feeling hopeless about their futures, and maybe this is a factor in why they as an aggregate have done worse in school relative to girls in recent years, but the solution isn't to lower standards.
> When people first do anything they are always bad
Depending on what you mean by "bad", this is not necessarily true. Some people are better at certain things than others if you control for the amount of practice they've had. Take a group of children who have never played the piano. Give them a recording of a simple song, and tell them to listen to the song and play around with the piano for 1 hour and try to play something that sounds like that song at the end of that hour. Even with zero practice, some people will do better at this than others.
But in this case, isn't the "third party" just a piece of client-side software that performs a bunch of http requests to systems the client user is allowed to access, on a device the user is allowed to use, in order to aggregate the results and show them all in one spot? It's not being sent to third party systems off the user's phone.
Banning it would be like restricting certain sql clients, like allowing the CLI clients, but banning pgAdmin or MYSQL Workbench.