axau
axau on Hacker News
SB-827 is great, but I’m assuming its chance of passing is about zero. Am I wrong? What else can be done?
/r/CryptoCurrency is best used for entertainment, not technical analysis.
> For that matter I’ve also never had anyone of any gender implore me to be careful when loading my children into a car, which statistically speaking is far more warranted.
This would be extremely surprising to me. Citation needed.
This is why I said, in my original comment, "and the property is large enough" (implying it doesn't interfere with others; or you have a permit, ...).
I'm sure you knew that though. What exactly is your point? Would you like me to rewrite my original post in fully specified legalese just so you can't nitpick? :P
Does it matter? Do you think we should blacklist people if they allegedly hold or have at some point allegedly held unfashionable opinions?
What a horrible precedent.
The H1Bs I know that support Trump do so mostly because of economic reasons, and because of the immigration policies, like fixing H1B abuse, and making legal immigrants take priority over illegal ones (Democrats are perceived to do the opposite).
It doesn’t really matter how discrete or not they are if even if you know about it you can’t do much about it.
I’m also not convinced by a “don’t worry the camera is bad” argument; looking at drone footage online it seems to have plenty of resolution to distinguish people in one’s backyard, for example, and I’d expect those to only get better over time.
Yes, and those could fall under the properties you own exception (or have permission to use from the owner).
USA, which, contrary to popular belief, has lots of restrictions on the use (though not necessarily ownership) of guns. Try discharging a weapon anywhere near a major metropolitan area and let me know how it goes :)
I hope one day drones are regulated similarly to guns, i.e. de facto banned unless some exception applies, such as:
- you're in the middle of nowhere
- you're doing it exclusively on a property you own (and the property is large enough)
- the use case is in the public good (e.g.: police can use guns)
In other cases, the downsides are large given potential for abuse/voyeurism/sabotage, and upsides seem nil.
Related question: is it enough to be a EU citizen, or must one also live in the EU?
It's not just about left/right.
Compared to SF, LA is a true big city, as close to New York as you can get on the west coast. In comparison SF is a petty small town, complete with the provincial backstabbing and all.
If the % required to service it was growing significantly, that'd be a problem. The debt outstanding growing, on its own, doesn't matter.
The government is not a human who better pay off their debt by 65 or they're screwed. The government'll keep receiving income "forever", in a pretty predictable way. So there is no reason to ever stop borrowing; it'd be leaving money on the table (utility of a dollar now > utility of a dollar later).
The title is not very useful; this quote gives some context: “It's the highest amount of borrowing in six years, and a big jump from the $519 billion the federal government borrowed last year.”
I agree, it won’t be enough, but it’s a great first step. Currently, given how difficult it is to find reliable data, one often can’t easily disprove even the most ridiculous of arguments (like the various groups in the Bay that believe, almost literally, that to solve rising costs people should stop building, rent control, BMR, and similar).
This is great, it is about time some scientific process was forced into a system that sadly has been largely driven by protests of idiots in large numbers so far.
Obviously. This is why I said "in general".
Because, in general, you’re free to enter into contracts that limit your rights if you so desire.
Whether or not Apple/whatever was being shifty or not is a matter of opinion. The fact is, though, that nearly every other country already had a territorial tax system.
We’re talking about the repatriation part here, not all the others, which are a different debate.
Because the US is not going “down a path that neglects its obligations”. In fact quite the opposite since it just got a massive tax revenue increase. So comparing it to a situation where the US decided to just stop levying tax doesn’t make sense.
That makes no sense. Then the government would get nothing, plus give up future leverage, so obviously it will not do that. Comparing what happened to having no tax is a straw man.
What happened here is that the government finally set a rate that is agreeable to both parties, which is of course in its interest and long overdue.
What’s wrong with a Chevy Volt? (~50 battery only, 400+ total)
Almost certainly not. Many people in SF avoid long term rentals very much on purpose, because of the city’s comical tenant protection laws.
Probably because they'd want to minimize correlation between the thing being monitored breaking and the thing monitoring it breaking.
Hah! Meanwhile in Facebook group chats, anyone can add anyone, and they get to see the whole conversation history immediately and completely irrevocably (even if someone removes them later, they get to keep the history until their removal, and you can’t delete Facebook messages either).