I prefer the “Darth Jar Jar” and “The Bloop” levels of conspiracy theories.

I think you’re suggesting that he committed to being a 1-term president as part of his campaign. You might be remembering a bunch of sensationalized articles based on a Politico article where an unnamed “prominent advisor” said “he won’t be running for reelection” and a bunch of other mostly unnamed people also suggested he wouldn’t/shouldn’t run again. Which led to tons of other articles, which parroted it as fact.

The Politico article even further went on to be updated after it was first published to add a quote from Biden’s deputy campaign manager and communications director at the time, which stated Biden was “not privately considering declining to run for re-election.”

So he never made that commitment and the only official communication refuted the speculation.

Reference Politico - Biden Single Term

Slate even covered this recently in another article, where they were unable to locate any official commitment related to serving a single term.

Reference Slate - Biden Single Term

Disclaimer: I also wish we had another option, just presenting some evidence. Maybe it’ll make you feel better with your choice.

I’m not at home to check at the moment, but I think it’s Jobs Filterer for LinkedIn by Jonathan Kamens. Lets you prefilter with regex for like company or job title, and give you a button to manually hide specific listings as well.

I was looking on LinkedIn recently, had to get an extension just to hide all those, really cleaned up my search results after a while.

I’m thinking either he used it as a canteen to carry more water further, or as a rain barrel to capture it, not just as a cup to drink from at places where water was readily available.

For something I’m paying for, I want no ads, recommended or otherwise.

For something I get for free, if it’s easily skippable/ignorable, I don’t really care, I’ll skip it or mute the tab or whatever. If I can’t, I’d rather have a like sniper level targeted ad (use all the data!), really try to show me something I’ll care about (there was some like 10 minutes ad about the science behing glass by one of the guys from MythBusters, I watched the whole ad, it was great). The demographic level targeted ads are my 2nd least favorite, mostly because it feels like I usually need to suffer through what is a targeted ad but if they bothered to exclude some of the audience based on some data points (looking at you luxury car ads, it’s just never going to happen), they’d know I’m a bad target, I’d rather some generic add over those. My least favorite ad though, when I get an ad in a language I don’t even understand, like at least match my primary language, wasting everyone’s time…

There are women who intentionally choose to be a single parent. Like they’re single, they get a sperm donor, have a kid. It’s not some insane thing. Kids should have a supportive and caring environment, whomever raises them. Not every kid with a single caregiver is neglected, nor is every kid with 2 or more caregivers properly cared for.

Americans use any/all of bedrooms/bathrooms/square footage/lot size

maybe they can create some category that makes it clear that it’s folk medicine.

We call folk medicine that’s proven to work “medicine”.

You’d limit Ultimate Beneficial Ownership of the properties, not direct ownership.

I’d probably do something like: No individual or private entity may have Direct, Indirect or Ultimate Beneficial Ownership exceeding or of multiple of any of X(2-5?) Single Family properties, Y(2-3?) low density Multi-tenant properties, or Z(1-2?) high density Multi-tenant properties. Excluding the first wholely and solely owner occupied property. Excluding Ultimate Beneficial Ownership of less than A(.01-5?)% of a property. Excluding Ownership less than B(30-180?) days. Failure to comply results in forfeiture of newer ownership to REGULATOR-TBD until compliance is met. Multi-tenant properties have C (5-10?) residences

IANAL, probably some other loopholes that need closing. But the intent would be to limit consolidated ownership of many properties. But not impact several of the more reasonable ownership structures, nor impact churn of properties. The regulator would sell whatever extra it gets to fund housing programs.

For my $, Wendy’s is winning the value competition. Their value deals are cheap and decent, their reward system is better, their online deals are better. Subjectively, I like the taste better, so that’s nice too.

BK and McD offer better deals at volume than for a single person meal, but even then it’s not better than Wendy’s. Single person it’s just not even a contest.

It’s more about the hardware/firmware/software uniformity and reliability for some people. My friend is in this camp, he doesn’t want to need to manage a PC, he just wants a box he can reliably turn on and use.

Gotta crank up that dystopia meter.

This is slowly moving toward having Content On Demand. Imagine being able to prompt your content app for a movie/series you want to watch, and it just makes it and streams it to you.

ADA covers a bit of that already, and can already be effectively welded against return to office policies, but they are individual specific exceptions to a global policy. This was targeted illegal discrimination.

It certainly doesn’t hurt, but she won based on it being an illegal form of discrimination causing some form of harm, a non-discriminatory policy might be viewed differently.

If by AI, you mean the things people are making today and calling AI, no, they’re all basically powerful regression algorithms. They can be strong tools for people to use to solve complex problems. Anything a program does will be based on what it was programmed to do, at best it will find novel things based on being programmed to look for novel things randomly and people will test and confirm those guesses. They already kind of do this for some medical purposes. Is trying an uncountably large number of randomized guesses and giving a probability for success based on historical data intelligent?

Could a true AI exist like we see in SciFi, maybe?

Other people had the capability to do what Copernicus did, but lacked desire/resources. A LLM will never have the capability for a novel idea.

Holy shit, what a “HR” style take. People want improved cash to effort ratios, far and away above anything in this article. More cash, more or better benefits, more time off, more efficient work with the same output expectations, WFH, shorter days, shorter weeks. But all that costs the company, so instead we get these stupid things that largely cause even more wasted time at work, causing more effort to get your same output and getting an even lower value of what people care about.

I’d like to see a lawyer who would argue that “any reasonable person living and functioning in society could conceivable construe that them taking 28 000 dollars worth of gas was definitely the system working as designed, and they were at no point aware that they were doing anything illlegal.”

“There is considerable overlap between the intelligence of the smartest bears and the dumbest tourists.”

“I thought I’d won some kind of free gas contest, why else would my card give free gas?”

People can honestly be idiots as you pointed out.

The business holds all the cards when it comes to asking for and accepting payment. If they failed to do that in the way they wanted, it’s on them.

Ugh, really? In software development, or in developing anything that involves an end-user, such things are taken into consideration. Especially when there’s payment cards involved.

Thanks for the good laugh, this indicates way more faith in business side middle managers than is due. They ask for dumb shit all the time and make the devs do it. While I can’t rule out it being some kind of coding defect, because those also happen all the time, there’s definitely a non-zero probability that someone asked for it to work this way because it was convenient to operate or cheap to implement. Companies involved in payment processing are far from infallible, they just eat their mistakes and make the customer whole most of the time. I’ve worked at 2 different large banks, shit is held together with duct tape, prayers and throwing money at it some of the time.

It’s not the customer’s responsibility to try to figure out why and make some determination if the too good to be true deal is real. If it gave it out for a penny, is that too much of a deal? What about half price? 1 penny discount? Where’s the line?

Regardless, I could see someone designing it as a feature because “nobody would ever swipe their card twice normally”.