Much of the data in there is not the highest quality, precisely because it is user generated. There are often 5 to 10+ entries for the same thing. Sometimes it means a difference of 5-10 calories, but other entries miss key nutrition values entirely. Worse, some of them are flat out wrong, often deliberately so. Finding the "right" entry for your item AND trusting that the values are correct is a bit of a chore even with the barcode scanner.

At first when I read this story, I figured the cost was to assist in data cleanup and better curation ultimately providing a premium experience worth paying for. Sadly that doesn't look to be the case here...

Instead of playing the game of "copy great products and move them to the top" they can simply switch to having companies pay for top search results. Significantly less overhead and much faster return on "investment" with almost no risk to the company. Google style if you will.

Optimize the software on the driver's side so that they have a lot more control about where and when they work. Instead of being a taxi company fueled by tech, think micro-transactions.

.

If I am planning to drive to the store late in the day, let me as a driver input that trip ahead of time with an acceptable window of departure. The system will attempt to match me up to riders who also want to go that way at about the same time. Driver makes less (they were going there anyways), rider may wait a little longer or need to plan ahead better, less cars on the road, rider pays less, everyone wins.

With so many drivers and so many trips, the tipping point for this to work out seems so trivial to reach... Make it about ride SHARING and it will work out :)

I suspect 75k as I was slightly after 97 as a reference :)

With quantum computing it is now possible to get the refutation prior to the release of the original article. This may actually be the proof we have been waiting for!

Good thing I am mining bitcoin like crazy so I can afford stuff when things get too warm! /sarcasm

I am mostly in the same boat. Generally I use a ride share app for trips to/from the airport and occasionally on short trips instead of renting a car.

If I am downtown and need to travel 1-3 miles I have a few options:

1. Walk (ok if weather and time permit, often this is not great for those two reasons)
2. Subway - depending on where I am going this either costs about half of an Uber and/or takes 3 times as long
3. Bikeshare - cost is a bit high, I end up arriving sweaty and the ride is often not too safe or is on the slower side
4. Electric Scooter - almost the same cost as Uber, probably a bit slower in most cases, not as safe
5. Drive - parking is easily double or triple the cost of Uber not to mention the lost time looking for a space
6. Taxi - hard to get one and cost about double of an Uber
7. Bus - takes about 4-5 times longer to arrive due to bus routes being terrible in almost all cases

One of these options has door to door option, reasonable cost, climate control, relative safety, and almost no effort to pay attention during transit.
Until the market presents a better option it is going to be Uber/Lyft for these city rides for me...

Not mine, but I saw this a while back and it really opened up my eyes and gave me a good laugh because it is so true. https://recruiterscouch.com/re...

We already lost the battle; Verizon already has this data. The consumer might as well 'benefit' from it too. Cat isn't going back in the bag.

But the finance industry should be. Car makers don't care how the miles are driven - sure there will be a few less cars in active usage if this plan goes well, but I see them making it up in new revenue streams like Lyft partnerships. The real losers might end up being finance companies and sleazy used car lots who make a killing not off sales but off finance costs. An overall win for society if you ask me.

Here is the text of the email I used - please write your representative today!

I strongly urge you to support the Surveillance State Repeal Act that is being proposed by Reps. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.). We need smarter protections in place on both sides of this issue and this Act is a step in the right direction. Protecting our country is important, but we can't sacrifice our freedom to achieve our goals. Please take a stand for the freedom our nation was founded on and work with other representatives to achieve a safe and free nation we can all be proud to call home.

While I agree with most of your post, I will point out what the difference could be. Intention makes up a very large portion of how the law interprets actions. In your examples when a company or person manually targets it is clear that their intention is "not good" however when automation is involved it could be the case that the intention was different. This can obviously get into a gray area and is easier for the company to claim ignorance, but that is the general idea around intention.

I would rather the campus be located away from urban area. Less traffic, less driving, cheap/free parking, cheaper food, less chance of crime happening to me or my properly while at or traveling to work and for most people closer to home. This is double so if locally aimed marketing and walk in customers are not very frequent.

Does anyone have that website handy where you can enter your card number to see if it was stolen? That could be pretty helpful for people to figure out their risk level here...