Comment IRA??? (Score 0) 21
Why call it a 401(k)? It's an Individual Retirement Account, aka an IRA.
It is clearly not already authorized by Section 401, subsection (k) of the 1978 version of the Internal Revenue Code.
Why call it a 401(k)? It's an Individual Retirement Account, aka an IRA.
It is clearly not already authorized by Section 401, subsection (k) of the 1978 version of the Internal Revenue Code.
Most cities try to treat electric bikes with a weak enough motor as regular bikes.
But the bikes would routinely abuse the process. In NYC the speed limit is 15 mph for an electric bike.
People routinely do things like sell an e-bike has a 'max' speed of 15 mph when the engine can easily do 20 mph. Sometimes they put in a limiter (that can be easily removed), sometimes they do not even bother to do that. Sometimes they sell bikes with haul capacity and the max speed is 15mph --- when the hauler is full.
It is not like cops test them or anything.
In the process of confirming RFK, Trump specifically promised Cassidy that he would not support a primary challenge if Cassidy voted in favor of RFK. Trump has since reneged on that promise.
If you broadcast any national secrets on open radio, unencrypted, it is YOU that are committing the crime, not the people listening to them. You have to be a special type of stupid to broadcast state secrets on open radio and then arrest the people listening to them.
I could see a charge if he decyrpted a secret code. (but I would laugh at them for making one that easy to decrypt.)
This is the real problem with dictators. When they do something stupid, they try to arrest other people for their stupidity. See Trump and Powell.
Look, police obviously need the capability to do things like enter private property and decode information found on the phones of drug dealers.
The key however is always the safe guards. And it is NOT that hard to understand how to implement the safe guards:
1) If the creepy guy down the street can be charged with a crime for doing it, the police should HAVE to get a warrant/subpoena/approval from a judge to do it. Why? Because some cops are/become the creepy guy down the street. They have girlfriends and old enemies from high school, etc.
2) If the cop gets permission/warrant, they should be required to link it to an open case. If that case gets closed, 5 years later the target should be notified of the privacy invasion. This gives us a means to eventually figure out if the cops were abusing the process. Without that information we are unlikely to ever discover police abuses. Did they lie about an anonymous witness to check their ex girlfriend's boyfriend out? etc. etc.
3) Cops need to be really investigated/fired for misuse of this power. The police chief can NOT simply undo it - that is just the police chief abusing their powers.
I have heard so many horror stories of job candidates. Often with no chance of finding out why, but people can lose jobs because:
1) name is similar to a pedophile from another state.
2) debt from identity theft - when they did not know it was going on and were NOT told by the employer.
3) their index finger was too long.
4) wrong age/race/gender/religion - yes this is illegal in the US but it still happens.
Companies get inundated with way too many categories which leads them to be arbitrary. They treat job seekers like crap and there is nothing the seeker can do.
The bare minimum the employers can do is to give the candidate any and all information they gathered from alternative sources.
Do you know how difficult it is to exactly hit the mark on safety? Do you know easy it is to miss detecting a dangerous chemical, bacteria, virus, or fungus?
If the companies are not complaining about our protection requirements being excessive that can only mean they are ineffective.
There is no perfection - doing exactly what is known to be necessary means we are not doing enough to protect against the unknown dangers.
Everyone I know would rather spend more money on water than electricity.
Most people - including doctors - think we are unknowingly consuming pollutants that are responsible for the increased rate of certain diseases.
If a politician hole tries to cut the quality of my water, claiming it is too expensive, I will vote against them.
Water shortage is both a) obvious, b) fixable with restraint, and c) fixable with science.
A) It's not a new or argued problem, it is obvious. There are no conspiracy idiots claiming it is a hoax. We know about and politicians on all sides want to fix it. For this reason there is already a massive amount of people working on the issue with little to no political issues.
B) The main reason for the water crisis is not really human population growth, but human greed. We can cut back on the really stupid things like data center use and the thirsty crops in drought prone areas. It is stupid to plant almonds in California and if things get really bad we can cut those trees down. If we have to cut our alfalfa, cotton and sugarcane use, it will affect us but not wipe us out. Rice is an issue - we really need it despite the water costs so that might cause some problems.
C) Finally, we are making huge strides in desalination. In the past 30 years, the cost has dropped to about a third of what it used to be. More importantly, it is both a electrical power intensive technology AND can be run in off hours. We can easily co-locate solar power plants directly on top of desalination plants, turning seawater into drinkable water during sunny days and literally storing it for a rainy day.
This IS an issue. We need to watch it. But it is not a scary doomsday event.
The majority of Trump stupidity s caused by him totally ignoring the Constitution and then ordering the Republicans to vote in the things he wants.
Tariffs? That's a congress thing, not a presidential one. He can't create them, Congress has to.
Appointing Supreme Court Judges requires Senate approval. In fact almost every appointment requires Senate approval.
Getting rid of departments and cutting budgets? All Congress.
If you do not think the Wannabe King is not going to do something stupid like appoint himself as the next Supreme Court Judge, then you underestimate him.
1) Does having worms eat your brain actually increases your intelligence?
2) Is delicious, divine, undercooked pork worth the risk?
3) Is it a good idea to trust someone that had 'cognitive difficulties' from a totally preventable issue with maintaining the health of a nation?
4) Can you totally laugh at Republican Senator Cassidy for thinking Trump would not support a republican primary against him if he just voted for RFK jr?
Don't worry - only 11 more months to get protection against further stupidity and 3 more years left before we can get rid of the big problem.
The first part of your analysis is true.
But Tariffs ARE automatically bad.
Tariffs always:
1) Tax the poor people not the wealthy. The wealthy save their earnings and travel outside the country (where they can buy things without those tariffs) while the poor spend all their earnings and rarely travel.
2) Make things more expensive in your country compared to outside of it. Hurts both the consumer and the industries buying raw materials.
3) Encourage you to buy expensive local products instead of cheaper foreign products. This is anti-Capitalism, creating bad jobs in your country and hurting good workers outside of it.
I am disappointed that the Bank of England hires crazy idiots. And that they do not fire them over talking to reporters.
I am further disappointed that MSN allows stories about crazy idiots to air.
The US government used to encourage stories about Aliens to hide their top secret aircraft programs. They sincerely regret this now, in large part because they did not think there were enough morons out there for this to become a problem.
They have had no contact with aliens. If they did have contact with aliens:
1) There would be no significant panic.
2) No one would consider covering it up because panic is not that scary and hiding it would make things worse (The cover up is worse than the crime).
3) If they tried to cover it up, they would fail: Snowden, Reality Winner, Pentagon Papers (Daniel Ellsberg).
Given the size of the universe, I am pretty sure that life exists outside of our planet - in another galaxy if not our own. Whether that life is more advanced than bacteria, whether it is intelligent, whether it is space faring are all good questions.
But the chance of them contacting us is minute, let alone the chance of them visiting. The speed of light is a real bitch.
There is no distinction between any AI program and some existent game.