pdeuchler
Of course both answers to that question have very far reaching implications, and to answer one way or another almost always reveals oneself to be a hypocrite in some way. But instead of actually engaging with these hard questions we equivocate and try to build logical defenses that allow us to have our cake and eat it too.
Unfortunately with modern science and medicine we will be forced to reckon with the consequences of these unspoken choices soon or later. I don't pretend to know what is correct here, and I don't necessarily pass judgement on those who would answer these questions differently than I, but I do have large amounts of contempt for anyone who tries to ignore the realities of their positions and even more contempt for those who think the answer is obvious and self explanatory.
Willing to bet it's SQL Server and Azure AD
FTA:
“Some people said the basic income had zero effect on their productivity, as there were still no jobs in the area they were trained for,” said Prof Helena Blomberg-Kroll, who led the study. “But others said that with the basic income they were prepared to take low-paying jobs they would otherwise have avoided.
...
It also encouraged some participants to get more involved in society, by undertaking voluntary work, for example. “Some found the guaranteed income increased the possibility for them to do things like providing informal care for their family or their neighbours,” said one of the researchers, Christian Kroll.
“The security of the basic income allowed them to do more meaningful things, as they felt it legitimised this kind of care work. Many of the people who performed such unpaid activities during the two-year period referred to it as work.”
You clearly didn't read the study or even the guardian article. There was clear evidence that basic income encourages people to find jobs in many cases, just not conclusively in every case (which no proponent of UBI argues).
> There was a pretty big and important hypothesis that the study was trying to pin down: is UBI profitable? Do you give 500 EUR and get more back?
That wasn't even close to the hypothesis that they were trying to disprove. You made this up off the top of your head. They were trying to develop a simpler, less bureaucratic welfare system that didn't have the pitfalls of the existing system while measuring dependent's wellbeing.
> And the answer is: there is no trace of that.
Again, not true. There was plenty of evidence that a UBI (as enacted in this study) could have positive economic effects, just not in every single case, and not conclusively.
Pretty much the only conclusive result from this study was that the dependents had a better sense of well being on average from the control group. That's it. I have no idea where you got these made up factoids from, I cant find any kind of review or analysis that shares your opinions or statements.
Most people who work in customer facing roles in Vegas are already extremely paranoid and careful about hygiene. Gloves, constant cleaning of commonly touched surfaces, etc. Being a low level casino/hotel employee teaches you very quickly that humans are just sentient germ dispersal machines.
You know, my dad always told me to just listen to people... eventually they'll tell you who they truly are.
In reality, this question is almost always instantly answerable. You're either still building out your MVP and desperately need customers to validate your idea, in which case the answer is "No", or you're an established startup with runway and a growing customer base, in which case the answer is "Yes".
This is only true if you consider pure brute force as the only way to "break" RSA 2048. While as of right now there is no hard evidence there has been plenty of hearsay that some of the 5 Eyes have had tools for years that can drastically reduce the brute force complexity needed for RSA 2048 keys.
There is also really no such thing as being "paranoid with no gain" when it comes to computational security, since digital assets can be stored indefinitely and compromised in the future with more advanced computational power or techniques. On the contrary, given the computational power of your average laptop/server these days there's really no reason to _not_ use 4096 keys, unless you are operating on FAANG scale.
This is, of course, exactly my point. "High yield venture debt" only exists due to absurdly low interest rates and an abundance of capital being driven out of public markets and into private ones. Now that the free lunch is over do not be surprised that your lenders come calling now that your "high yield" (read: risky) loan is no longer profitable under current market conditions.
> In a highly competitive market, if you don’t lever up, your competitors will eat your market.
I.E. When capital is cheap and abundant it is possible to burn cash on an unsustainable business plan for marketshare, but when the entire market itself rapidly shrinks your business plan is horribly unviable.
I have no problem with this, but that's clearly not what GP is advocating for. I doubt most in this thread even comprehend how much food is required for a 30 day supply of your average household. Buying double the amount of perishables doesn't seem unreasonable, stocking up for a month+ is absurd.
The shelves are getting fully restocked every single morning. Go to your local Target/Walmart/Grocery store when they open if you don't believe me. Stores, suppliers, and producers have already begun rationing and metering out goods onto shelves explicitly because of people hoarding. The shelves being empty are a result of idiots running around trying to buy up everything they can, and stores reacting properly. The "free market" is already acting in response to those hoarders, they're discouraging it, and preventing it on a grand scale pretty effectively.
Your complaint about "not allowing the price to float" is a complete non sequitur even if you're still the type to swallow free market ideology hook, line, sinker, because people buying in surplus isn't demand. It's just, well, hoarding. Coronavirus isn't going to cause people to be thirstier, hungrier, or need to wipe their ass more. People are just buying in advance. Without people fearing for a worldwide pandemic nobody would be willing to pay increased prices for these goods. So it's not actually about demand, it's about artificial scarcity driven by a global pandemic. Thus, price gouging tickets.
But even if you don't buy any of that, the vast majority of our supply lines are JIT, so "empty shelves" aren't really a thing... what we'd really see is a dwindling of supply over a period of time. Which isn't happening.
Even if there was a marginal benefit to yourself it would be still be incredibly selfish to stockpile to the detriment of the vulnerable. The scarcity mentality is very dangerous, please do not perpetuate it.
This is crazy FUD that will only make the situation worse. Stockpiling rarely, if ever, helps, and overwhelmingly hurts the poor and disabled. The absolute worst of "fuck you got mine" mentality on display here. Please do not do this, and please do not advocate for this kind of panic. You are actively contributing to a terrible situation.
To repeat: there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to stockpile rations, food stuffs, common goods, etc. In no country as of yet has this been necessary, even in the most hard hit areas. Do not do this. Going to the grocery store once vs four times is not going to make the difference between you getting the virus or not, and it's absurd that people would even consider this. The virus has been in and around our communities for months now, engaging in prepper fetishes now is closing the barn door after the horses have left. Stockpiling goods is completely ineffective anyway. The majority of our supply chains are JIT, and suppliers are already rationing and metering out goods. Stockpiling is pointless, you're just going to look like an idiot in the check out line.
Limit large social engagements. Keep up mild exercise, get plenty of sleep, and eat healthily. And for the love of God wash your hands. If you have frequent contact with immunocompromised people or the elderly be more vigilant about hygiene, wear a mask, disinfect any surfaces the both of you touch frequently. Consider doing their errands for them as well.
Everyone will eventually get the virus. It's almost certain. The goal here is just to prevent a thundering herd problem with medical resources.
What a laughable statement. Of course he is, he's beholden to his own interests as a billionaire. Bloomberg is special interests personified. How is it possibly a good thing that any single person in our country can elect themselves via sheer wealth?
Also incredible that you phrase being beholden to many people's interests as a bad thing. Of course there is corruption by another name when candidates take money from Super PACs (Buttigieg/Biden), but isn't it a good thing that, for example, Sanders is now beholden to the interests of his over 2 million donors? Almost like he's beholden to the interest of his constituents, as an elected representative...
Evergreening has absolutely nothing to do with the FDA and everything to do with the USPTO and the specific chemical makeup of insulin, which has unique characteristics that make it very easy to engage in effective "evergreening". This also allows drug companies to manipulate pricing lists in deceptive ways that fool both doctors and distributors into placing higher cost (but chemically identical) products onto "preferred" prescription lists of insurance companies. There are also current court cases where there are accusations of fraud and illegal kickbacks around those practices.
The original research for the synthesis of insulin was actually done in Europe by a private citizen (not a government entity). That research was followed up on by a surgeon with a private practice in Canada, and only after a time was it taken to the U of Toronto. The work leading to a manufacturable insulin process was done in collaboration with another private citizen (not affiliated with the U of Toronto). The trio only decided to patent the discovery upon literal threat by Eli Lilly to steal it for sale. They then sold it to the U of Toronto for a single dollar because of a strong belief that it would have been ethically bankrupt to profit from the manufacture and distribution of such an important drug. Funny you left that out!
But anyway, to your main point, it's interesting you neglect to mention that the main manufacturers of "generic" insulin (there's actually no such thing, but that's a topic for a different time) are the same companies who manufacture the name brands. They do this for pure price discrimination reasons; the new "generics" you reference (Admelog/Insulin Aspart) are exact chemical duplicates of their higher priced cousins. They prevent other companies from creating their own "generics" through a process called "evergreening" where they change patents in small, insignificant ways while still maintaining the patent on the core product. They then force other manufacturers into pricing and distributorship deals in order to license these patents to prevent cannibalization of their own products. Most of these deals include strict price controls. Have you ever wondered why those regulatory controls are so strict? Maybe it's because of regulatory capture as a part of this complex system to artificially inflate drug prices. That would require more than a skin deep analysis relying on middle school free market ideology though.
This isn't even getting into the "manufacturer rebate" programs most drug companies have for, again, pure price discrimination and marketing reasons. Or the fact that for the same exact chemical formula insulin costs have increased over 10x in the past 20 years. This also doesn't address the fact that we're seeing 20% year over year increases in insulin prices while drug manufacturers post profit increases almost in lock step. Feel free to read their quarterly earnings reports, they state in plain black and white that they purposefully price insulin in accordance with how expensive it is to treat diabetes _without_ the drug. To quote John Lechleiter, the CEO of Eli Lilly, “Yes, they [referring to insulin] can be expensive, but disease is a lot more expensive”. I believe that's called "extortion", I wonder if getting rid of regulatory roadblocks can solve that problem.
There's also no such thing as insulin "side effects"... lower quality/old synthesis method insulin just doesn't work as efficiently which means you have to use more of it or can't use it in modern insulin pumps. Most insulin manufactured today is biologically identical to the insulin manufactured 10 years ago. Most of the quality of life improvements occurred long before the recent price surges.
But then again your post compares iPhones and Netflix with a drug that over a million Americans have to take in order to survive, so I doubt any of this will reach through your armor of specious and unserious speculation.
Jr. & Midlevel SW Engineers
JumpCloud is a fast growing startup in Boulder, CO. We offer cutting edge hardware and tools, full benefits (medical, dental, vision, 401(k), etc.) and a fast-paced but casual startup working environment. Local or relocatable applicant preferred. We have offices in both Boulder and Denver, and will soon be opening a third.
At JumpCloud we manage the identities of our customer's employees and we take that responsibility very seriously. Every day thousands of businesses rely on us to make work happen and the JumpCloud security team ensures it all happens securely. We're hiring for all roles across the company but we need software engineers of all levels to help us automate and improve our security processes and posture. We are firm believers in policy-as-code and we do not play the compliance monkey game. You will be shipping product code, architecting internal tooling, building pipelines, and automating infrastructure. Not interested in the minutiae of security? No problem. No prior security knowledge needed, only the desire to build reliable, scalable, and secure systems. This will be a cross functional team where you wear many hats, so generalists and full stack engineers are welcome.
https://jumpcloud.com/careers/ or bigphil [AT] jumpcloud [DOT] com
Our stack: Golang, Python, Node, Postgres, Mongo, AWS
Everyone wins except the common man, who now must deal with the chilling effects of media and communication monopolies having the power of judge, jury, and executioner when it comes to speech. No need to censor people you don't like if you just capriciously censor people without warning or due process... people will censor themselves for you after that.
Remember the problem isn't that these people had platforms, the problem is those platforms accepted money to promote and advertise these people. I'm sure facebook loved having these people churning around their recommendation engines, they probably drove engagement like crazy. But now the backlash isn't worth the profit, so we all have to pay the consequences.
Remember that sunlight is the best disinfectant, and "deplatforming" these people might make them as personalities go away, but their ideas and propaganda will surely fester and grow in the darker corners of the internet. Milo is a joke even among the alt-right now, but his vitriol and invective continue to grow in popularity.
https://twitter.com/search?q=from%3Aggreenwald%20fox%20news&...