So if I walked into a restaurant that specialized in a certain cuisine (choosing the right one out of hundreds is a skill, right?) and wrote down a list of ingredients, and the restaurant made me a meal with those ingredients according to however the restaurant functions (nobody can see into the kitchen, after all), does this make me a chef?
Most retail stores and restaurants already have cameras everywhere. I had a boss who would sit at home watching the feed and then call the store to yell at us when he thought we were burning sandwiches.
There’s still the issue of birds, which do not like these things in their airspace and, depending on the size, will absolutely either attack drones or be maimed by them. Also, helicopters and small planes often fly quite low. We haven’t had a great record with autonomous cars, but sure, let’s try autonomous flying drones. What could go wrong?
Bury your power lines, people!
(And by people I mean city utilites. Do not attempt to do that yourself, lol.)
I see your confusion. They could have worded this better, but it’s two grants being split between eight nonprofit financial institutions. My understanding is these entities will lend that money to communities to do ongoing infrastructure projects. The goal is “turning $20 billion of public funds into $150 billion of public and private investment to maximize the impact of public funds.” I don’t know how that part works exactly, but to me that doesn’t sound like a handout. Of course I would hope they would be held responsible for any mismanagement.
As for why they need to create a financial nework to do this: These kinds of projects can take many years and sometimes need ongoing financing. Apparently, when Obama tried to fund something like this, there was a lending bottleneck where I guess banks didn’t want to finance community infrastructure projects or something, so a lot of the funding just sat there until the grants expired. This is supposed to prevent that from happening.
Seems like the airline could have just… not over served him and none of this would have happened.
Edit: yeah it sounds like over serving alcohol may be a recurring problem for this airline:
“It said it bans between five and 10 customers each month for disruptive behavior, including intoxication.”
It’s insufferable that the answer is always “build your own.” Lemmy assumes that every single person on the planet is an engineer with enough free time to design, build, and troubleshoot every device they own.
But what about a car? Cars are as smart as smartphones now, and you certainly wouldn’t notice the small amount of power needed to collect and transfer data compared to driving the car. Some car manufacturer TOS agreements seemingly admit that they collect and use your in-car conversations (including any passengers, which they claim is your duty to inform them they are being recorded). Almost all the manufacturers are equally bad for privacy and data collection.
Mozilla details what data each car collects here.
I started a free trial of Adobe stock. I forgot to cancel after the first month. They charged me $30 for the next month, ok, that’s on me. But when I tried to cancel during that second month, they said I had signed a contract to pay them for a year (I didn’t, all I did was sign up for the free trial) and I now owe them $165 to cancel the subscription. So in essence they were going to charge me $195 for one month of Adobe stock. That’s insane.
If they know how many years they’ll hold the rights, that information should be given to the consumer, i.e., “you will have access to this media product for at least N years.” Then the consumer can make an informed decision (is $24.99 worth it to own a movie for 6 years? Etc). Otherwise it’s just a gamble. Everything else you can rent (cars, tools, equipment, venues, clothing, dumpsters) comes with very clear temporal terms. Imagine if rental car companies could remotely brick your rental car halfway through your vacation.
Lol I never said ignore it. Just don’t blindly pay without looking into it.
The earth is flat.
If no one contradicts that statement or downvotes me or anything, someone might later come along and read it and believe it just because no one else disagreed. There are a lot of people who haven’t had a great education or don’t have critical thinking skills, or are actual children. When people just make claims with no discussion of the merit of those claims, how can the less educated figure out they’re not true? After all, if the host invited this hypothetical flat earther to be on their show, there must be something legit about them, right? They don’t just invite any rando person off the street onto their show, do they?
Just a PSA, the IRS recently instituted some kind of AI algorithm that is re-flagging a lot of things that have already been resolved… a friend got a bill for $1500 which they had earlier sent a letter of apology for. He doesn’t actually owe anything, it’s just the glitchy algorithm sending the old bill out again.
If you don’t understand why you owe more, don’t just give up and pay it. The IRS can make mistakes too.
There’s a big difference between “this person doesn’t agree with my worldview” and “this person is spouting crazy nonsense and the host isn’t even questioning it,” which gives the nonsense a sheen of legitimacy.
Is it on the ceiling? Maybe attached to a smoke detector? Can’t really tell anything from the photo.
software latches onto existing installations, which can include government-owned surveillance cameras as well as privately owned cameras at businesses and homes.
How can that be legal, or even possible? If you and your partner film yourself in the bedroom, I guess they’re gonna tap into that too?
The thing is, whether or not an agent is a member of NAR, commissions have always been negotiable (maybe the real problem is that sellers don’t know this and don’t try to haggle). Agents could always choose to take less commission if they wanted to. But would you voluntarily take lower pay for no particular reason?
This “agents can now charge less in commissions” is BS because they always could. It changes nothing.
An enormous chunk of housing sits unused and empty because real estate speculators want to rent them out at exorbitant prices rather than use it for it’s intended purpose of having a roof over people’s heads.
If they are renting it out at exorbitant prices, then it’s not empty. If it’s empty, then they get zero money. You’re saying it’s both, which makes no sense. Interest rates and property taxes are both high right now. It costs investors money to hold empty property without renting it out. They don’t have to wait for people to pay inflated prices. The demand is already there.
I’m all for more regulation, especially for developers and investors. Stiupulate that at least 50% of all new housing built be affordable. Give incentives to rehab old condemned properties. And stop letting AI algorithms determine rental prices.
When I looked it said 13.9 million. But how many of those are habitable? Does that number include Airbnbs? Properties stuck in probate or the foreclosure process? How many of them are in senior communities that don’t allow younger people or families? The census data doesn’t specify any of that.
I doubt any place will hire you for only one day a week. That will not be helpful for them.