skhunted

Unionized workers can be hired on a temporary basis. By cushy contracts this means that the amount of wealth extraction from workers is not as great as it is in other American industries.

I see. Thank you for the clarification.

This is news to me regarding the level of shittiness of Apple's marketing. Do you have any sources? If not that is OK. I don't think it's outside the realm of feasibility that this is so. It's not an extraordinary claim. Apple executives have the aura of "good guys" but that is merely a public facing facade.

This is a strange narrative to me. Google and other companies have done crappy things without people calling for a break up of the company. It’s possible you are in your reality distortion field. An anti-Apple one.

I don’t know anything about this particular case but there is a gray area when it comes to what an owner of a platform should/shouldn’t be allowed to do. I hope the EU cracks down hard on both Apple and Google. Both of these platforms have become essential to modern life in many ways and as such a case can be made for strict government oversight of them.

China has been fighting a cyber war against the United States for quite some time. It is appropriate to respond to this.

There aren’t enough local farmers for all 350 million people in the U.S. for this to be practical advice. It is only practical for a fraction of the population.

If your complaint is the billions in aid to Ukraine then argue against it. Brining up the cost of the flight and other costs that are multiple orders of magnitude less makes you seem like a partisan hack who lacks consistency in your beliefs. This is especially so given the amount of golfing on taxpayer dime Trump did during his Presidency.

Your arguments would be a lot better without the on taxpayer’s dime reference. It is common for people to engage in leisurely activities. Being Secretary of State ought not mean that they can’t have fun and obviously wherever they go there will be taxpayer expense. It’s not that much money and isn’t worth quibbling over.

In my area Discord took the place of Meetup. Meetup went downhill when WeWork bought them.

Sorry. I should have said "more and more Americans" instead of "more and more people".

It is a step in the right direction because we are talking about it. The idea of a world leader being accountable for evil acts it now no longer as absurd as it was in 1900. Hopefully, soon, more and more people will wonder why U.S. leaders aren't similarly held accountable. It will be a good thing when that happens.

The U.S. is the most powerful nation in the world. We have an unprecedented capacity to destroy organized state power. It is naive to think that the first steps toward international accountability for world leaders would feasibly start with or initially include the U.S.

The goal is to try to set precedents so that eventually it is taken seriously and isn’t a joke. Hopefully some day it will apply to people like Kissinger.

When it comes to mathematics do you use the law of excluded middle? I ask out of curiosity. Wondering if your physical intuitions are “natural” (for lack of a better word) enough that it affects your view of mathematical logic.

There are vehicles that do more damage to roads than large pickup trucks. It's still the case that large pickup trucks do more damage to the road than small cars. Owners of pickup trucks are being subsidized by pedestrians and small car owners. They do not pay enough for the privilege of driving their vehicles in relation to the damage they cause.

Another way to make money in education is to make life easier for the teacher and have the students pay for the privilege. Automated grading with online quizzes and tests is an example of this phenomenon in higher education.

Sorry. I missed it. It was too clever for me!

This depends on your philosophy of mathematics. If you believe god gave us the nonnegative integers then in a very natural way one is led to the notion of algebraic integers. Whether this would be god’s creation or man’s creation depends on your view of who gets the credit in such a situation.

Terminology is often times used to encapsulate a lot of information in a single word or phrase. It’s sort of a compression of information to facilitate communication. Things like “roots of f” is a shorter way to say that: “the set of all x such that f(x) = 0”. As you get deeper into a subject the more terminology you encounter. This is why research papers are generally unintelligible to those with no training in the areas that the research is about. To not use terminology would make papers insanely long and far too tedious to read.

Azimov has a famous quote about ignorance that is appropriate. Clearly your ignorance is just as valuable and insightful as the experts.

Obviously the vast majority of legal experts, lawmakers and those knowledgeable on the subject believe Congress has this authority. For instance, every time the minimum wage gets updated one argument against updating it you don't hear people make is that Congress doesn't have the authority to do this.

You are welcome to research the topic yourself. There are lots of books on the history of labor rights and labor struggles in the U.S. and the role courts have played in this.

But you might be right that the experts on this topic know less than you and that there is no justifiable implied power of Congress to regulate labor markets.

It has always been the case that an agency rule or regulation could be challenged in the courts. There are lots of examples prior to the recent Chevron ruling of courts striking down agency rules.

What’s going to happen is that companies are going to pollute a lot more with impunity. It will be a wild west sort of situation. Our quest to become Ferenginar is well on its way.

The issue is the dismantling of Chevron deference. For 40 years regulatory authority has been granted and written by Congress with the understanding that Chevron defference was the law of the land. Now the Supreme Court is demanding a level of specificity that isn’t practical and it means rewriting may decades worth of legislation. Given that SCOTUS has also decided to upend statute of limitations as it pertains to challenging established regulations we are going to enter a period of regulatory upheaval.

There isn’t a specific line in the Constitution that gives Congress the right to regulate employment. This power of Congress is implied by the powers that are explicitly written in the Constution.

There are 5 axioms of Euclidean Geometry. Those 5 simple axioms have a vast number of implications as evidenced by all the theorems in Euclidean Geometry. In the same way there are logical conclusions to the statements in the Constitution. It is settled law that Congress can regulate employment.

Congress already gave the FTC the power to ban things that are unfair methods of competition and to ban acts that are unfair that affect commerce.

What the judge said according to the article:

The rule “is arbitrary and capricious because it is unreasonably overbroad without a reasonable explanation”

California’s experience can be used to show that the rule is not capricious or unreasonably broad. The act establishing the FTC gave it broad powers and it does have the authority to do what it did. However, it is clear that the Supreme Court is going in a direction to greatly reduce regulatory authority. This ruling will likely stand but it shouldn’t.

His wife divorced him partly because of his association with Epstein. She had much better moral fortitude than Bill. Gates is and will always be a villain. When you do villainous things you are a villain. There is no redemption for him.

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2022/03/melinda-gates-jeffr...

I wonder too and I think it’s below the number of users with issues with the butterfly keyboard but much higher than a trivial percentage.

It’s common enough that there are posts about this issue if you do a search for it.

Thanks for the feedback.