In my 10+ years of being on a fully remote team, we had one person who was lying about doing their job, and it was immediately obvious since the work wasn't getting done. Generally, everyone's job has some kind of output or interaction with others that would give away that they weren't doing the job. If not, then being in the office or not isn't going to change the situation.
A better analogy might be that mom bought groceries for the starving family down the road with a check and you cancelled the check, stole the checkbook, and changed the bank account password.
But clearly: did not spend it. Did not misappropriate it. That is much different.
To me it’s more like mom gave me money to pay the rent but my landlord is likely violating laws so in the meantime I am putting the rent in escrow while we sort out the facts.
But that wasn’t your decision to make. Maybe your picture of the landlord is incomplete, and you act as the hot-headed, short-sighted teenager your are, instead of sitting down with mom to discuss the situation.
Disagree. You are allowed to have agency. Mom would be proud of you for not wasting her money. If there is no crime, the landlord will be made whole. Maybe with a little interest at the prevailing rate.
And that's where the analogy falls apart, because yes, maybe it's okay for a teenager to have an agency, but billionaire friends of the president are not, in fact, allowed to have an agency on government spending! People who waltz in and have no fucking clue of how things work generally are not allowed to have an agency!
Remember when Musk built the submarine to save the kids in the cave, was absolutely useless, even actively obstructed others from saving them, and finally resorted to denigrate the diver saving them as a pedophile? That's exactly the same thing he is doing right now.
He’s not a “billionaire friend” in this role. He was asked by the president to do a job and he’s doing it. You expect the president to do everything by himself? Trump likes businessmen. Steve Mnuchin was another “billionaire friend” and it’s hard find fault in his tenure running treasury.
> He was asked by the president to do a job and he’s doing it.
1. And he did it in an illegal way, yes. If you wanna go back to Mom, you can go to the grocery but you cannot throw a bank heist and lock all employees out of the store so you can grab some bread
2. He doesn't have access to the store. Mom sent him to Costo without her card. You can't just storm into Costco. Go back to mom and get her card, if possible.
Is it illegal? My understanding is that paused appropriations are tied to the fiscal year. That’s September 30th. Are you sure they are not? Or are you just being an ideologue?
Nobody stormed anything. They just filed a dispute with their credit card company. Costco will get the funds if they win the dispute. If there is malfeasance at Costco don’t you want to know? What exactly are you afraid of?
On the other hand, eliminating wolves has a cost to it, which affects everyone and only benefits ranchers. Which is the more ethical outcome? Privatized gains and socialized losses, or socialized gains and privatized losses.
I did. I’m talking about the original elimination and any proposed future removal. It had an ecological impact last time, and it would again if we did it again.
I see it supports .har, but .warc support would be amazing. It's the iso standard for web archives, which would give you the ability to replay archived websites via multiple tools.
I don’t think Cigarette smoking became unpopular without heavy regulation. In countries that don’t have such restrictions, smoking is still ubiquitous.
The data [1] don't really show this. In particular as recently as 2001-2003 35% of young adults (in the US) said they smoked, versus an all-time historical high of 45% across all age groups for some context. By 2019 that figure was down to 10% for young adults. The first bans on advertising smoking went into effect in 1971!
So what happened in the ~2000 era window of time? The internet and social media started exploding in popularity. In fact you'll find that the graph of the decline in teen pregnancy [2] looks roughly similar to the decline in young adult smoking, and probably for the exact same reason.
A much more obvious reason for the decline in smoking is the popularization of vapes. If you look at U.S. adults, you'll see that the decline in tobacco smoking is almost entirely made up for by the increase in vaping.
Technically, of course, vapes aren't cigarettes. But It's a bit misleading to say that smoking is unpopular, when it's just been replaced by a doppelganger. Especially since vapes are also deeply detrimental to health [1].
Indoor smoking bans were passed during that period. This was a time period of major pushes to outright ban smoking. That’s when I saw it actually drop off.
The things that did the most to drive down use were raising the price of cigarettes (which fund the healthcare costs) and banning smoking indoors, where it affected even non-smoking workers [1]. When we stop subsidizing harmful behavior, we get a lot less of it.
Quite a sad analogy, since the outcome of Biden's inaction- no, active support, since he flooded Israel with money and weapons and ensured diplomatic cover at the UN- resulted in the killing of at least ten thousand children.
Ozone hole? We recognized the ozone layer had developed a hole which was growing. We identified the cause. Globally agreed to ban CFCs and implement replacements. Hole is mostly gone today.
The different between the two is the size of the CFC lobby (a single product category for diversified chemical companies) vs. the oil lobby (a sprawling industry): the oil lobby has corrupted many governments and politicians around the world to deny, delay, and prevent action because money. With ethical leadership, it is achievable, but this is rare and not enough action will ever be taken until it is far too late. Humanity has chosen to allow the greedy rich to risk omnicide and ecosystem collapse.
reply