This is terrible advice.
265 karma · joined January 11, 2020
This is terrible advice.
Nevertheless, I don't have a lot of sympathy for the business owner in this case. If you open a business in a non-compliant site 17 years after the ADA went into effect, and 13 years later still can't build a ramp, it might be time for another business to occupy that site.
Nevertheless, I can't understand why someone would open a cafe in 2007 at a site that wasn't compliant with a 1990 law without budgeting for bringing it into compliance.
The prefix/postfix change does something to the reader. It's a distraction trying to figure out if that change was intended, whether the author knows it has no effect, or whether I'm wrong about the change having no effect.
I appreciate the author doing the hard work of fixing this, especially with the code in full view of the public, but if I were an official reviewer I'd ask to get all the unnecessary changes removed.
And one's going 45, and one's going 99
Nevertheless, suing these agencies to prevent unwarranted surveillance is justified.
I don't think that's true. The tone of American political news nowadays doesn't seem that different than British newspapers in the 1990s. "It's the Sun wot won it" was an explicit boast about The Sun's polarizing influence... in 1992.
Of course both The Sun and Fox News in the US are part of Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. But if anything this style of news seems like it arrived in the UK ten or twenty years before it was manifest in the US.
The last generation to know freedom from planned activities during their school years.
It seems very unlikely that Renaissance/Medallion constantly finds these things, whereas other operations almost never do.
The conspiracy theorist in the back of my brain thinks that Renaissance/Medallion hires a lot of eggheads so they can plausibly claim to keep finding mathematical and operational edges, but the actual money-making strategy might be something else entirely.
In this case, the article mentions "meatier yields", and that two-word combination by itself is something I would bet on in a fight against any article-length analysis of the 2008 crisis.
As such, traceability will remain a risk for anyone receiving cryptocurrency payments. If a chain analysis reveals an illegal transaction as a precursor, it's going to be considered stolen goods, not money, as the article states.
Apart from that, every option you suggested just hands the problem off to the next person. Eventually people won't want to transact at all because they don't want to receive tainted bitcoins.
Companies want to provide some information to some people; but providing all information to all people is analogous to allowing customers to make a meal of free food samples, on a recurring basis.
Do they though? If China is hiring people who don't honestly fulfill their disclosure requirements, it may be the case that they're getting people who fake research results as well. They're actually selecting for low levels of integrity.
It's a sign in to Apple, if not a sign in with Apple, and it's weird because what I'm trying to use is Google's Maps application without signing into anything. What is going on with all of this?
Maybe the author of the article should write about how many bathrooms Swedes have, installed in series every 10 years rather than in parallel when the house is built. A one bathroom house where the bathroom has been replaced 4 times in 40 years counts as 4 bathrooms.