“The plea deal required Assange to admit guilt to a single felony count but also permitted him to return to Australia without any time in an American prison. The judge sentenced him to the five years he’d already spent behind bars in the U.K. fighting extradition to the U.S. on an Espionage Act indictment that could have carried a lengthy prison sentence in the event of a conviction. He was holed up for seven years before that in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London.
The conclusion enables both sides to claim a degree of satisfaction.”
This is straight up fraud. I believe that one of the reasons companies do this is to signal business growth to prospects and investors. For public companies, that’s a form of securities fraud. I observed this firsthand when doing a job search a few years ago. I would apply to new job listings as soon as they were published. After not hearing a response I would check in to see if the listing was still active. I would frequently see the exact same listing reappear every six weeks or so. I watched this cycle repeat for more than a year with some companies. Each time the job is re-listed, the clock resets on networks like LinkedIn. It creates the illusion of fresh business activity and growth. One specific company that did this was Snowflake. To clarify, I am directly accusing Snowflake of securities fraud.
What addon is that? Its very frustrating using LinkedIn and having to click through so many pages of useless results, especially all the listings from other job boards.
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 mentioned this in my comment below, that its used as a means to secure debt from banks since they have high employment activity. Fraud seems like an appropriate word, but its only illegal if theres actual enforcement.
Fascists do not see trans people as human beings. It’s not a matter of thinking. They literally view trans kids as subhuman and want to implement a state apparatus to forcefully abuse them with conversion therapy.
The issue is not that the parts aren’t titanium, its that there isn’t a paper trail documenting the titanium.
This is an issue, because improperly forged titanium can have issues that makes it unsuitably weak for its intended purpose. Having documentation showing where the materials came from, when it was inspected for defects and when it was manufactured is critical for safety.
United flight 232 had an engine explode in part due to defective titanium. This is a real safety concern.
Though the headline says boeing, the article mentions these undocumented parts being found in airbus planes as well. Its an industry problem, not a Boeing specific one.
Did they “fuck up” though? Or did they intentionally fire their best people in order to save money, knowing the consequences would be cheaper than the profit made.
The problem is it’s actually is sorta Boeing’s fuck up here. The questionable source titanium was caught at spirit aerospace who manufactures parts for Boeing and airbus. Spirit aerospace was originally a Boeing factory that was spun off into its own company in 2005 in one of Boeing idiodic stock pump schemes. Boeing on paper does not have control over spirit aerospace but all of spirit’s leadership came from Boeing with their CEO having worked for Boeing for 31 years. Boeing also has a lot of pull inside spirit being their largest customer by a significant margin. Boeing is currently in talks of buying back spirit aerospace to fix the mess they got themselves into.
Well the alternative here would have been to not say anything and cover it up. They found counterfeit material in their inventory and raised the alarm, nothing better they could have done. I don’t know what the acquisition process was for that stock, maybe they did fuck up by buying it, but once you realize the problem is there you have to say something or people die.
We are really going to have to wait for the FAA’s investigation because there’s still all sorts of questions about their acquisition process and where exactly was the certificate forged. The big question i have thought was when did spirit discover that the certificates were forged because they are claiming parts manufactured all the way back in 2019 were effected. I believe some suspicion on the side of spirit is warranted because this is the same company that is currently being investigated on claims that they were covering up safety issues. Not to speculate too much but I wouldn’t be surprised if spirit knew the titanium was fraudulent as early as 2019 and are only now doing something about it because they are being investigated for other issues and wanted to control the narrative.
Well sometimes it makes sense. It should really be for those psychos that clearly show signs of disregard for human life and would kill again if released.
It’s already for that. It happens only rarely and I doubt any were available for parole. That being said, it’s so rare we could just do without. 2022 had 18 people executed, we are already a hairsbreath away from not doing it so why bother.
My guess is out of all the people that have the power to orchestrate someone’s legal death, a select few actively get off on it and push for it.
It makes sense if society has collapsed and keeping prisoners alive isn’t possible without seriously straining infrastructure, so something like a civil war, but otherwise it’s pointless. They won’t be released, so they won’t kill again, so what’s the point?
It should really be for those psychos that clearly show signs of disregard for human life and would kill again if released.
And how do you determine that? If society was more skeptical and less prone to having a justice punishment boner, we could possible keep the death penalty for extreme situations, but we’re really just savages not far removed from the Roman Colosseum spectators demanding to see death.
“Minnesota and the CDC reported that the three hospitalized patients were treated with the anti-parasitic drug albendazole and recovered.”
Albendazole and mebendazole kill of intestinal parasites in the same way. They starve them of sugars for several hours. I bring both up just because it rings angry memories about US Healthcare. They typically work with a single dose treatment.
Mebendazole is a prescription pill in the US and despite having been made in around the early 1970’s and costing around 4 cents a pill to make, in the US, after getting a prescription, the pills are $250 a piece.
In most of the world, they are prescription free and you can pick up a 6 pack of them for like $12.
You know it’s weird, it seems like I can predict the way the judge votes, and likely which half of the US they live in, solely by the headline of “federal judge blocks Biden administration plan to…” with 100% accuracy.
Haven’t been wrong yet.
Seems almost like there’s some sort of political motivation here, not what’s best for the people.
Almost seems like the system is working… against the people?
But no that couldn’t be. Surely a judge, who sits at a federal level, would never be swayed by something so petty as kindergarten politics.
If you read the reactions from banks, it’s sickening. They are threatening to raise fees elsewhere, or interest rates, to “make up for lost revenue” because heaven forbid they just make less money and be okay with it.
Well just hold on there a minute, if they raise interest or charge higher fees on things that doesn’t disproportionately negatively impact poor people then it might be less predatory… And we can’t have that, we gotta keep punching those that can’t hit back.
the gun ownership attribute had three levels: no gun ownership, owning a pistol, and owning an AR-15,
This study design is bad, and they should feel bad. If they’re going to claim that people are afraid of AR-15s, they should compare it apples-to-apples with other rifles, or just ask about rifles generally, like they did with pistols.
Furthermore, any study asking opinion questions for what should be data-driven decisions are misleading at best and harmful at worst. If your concern is safety in communities, you should study actual safety, not feelings. It appears they want to make people feel safe, while not necessarily increasing safety.
Fair enough for a general survey question. However, the point about how policy decisions shouldn’t be based on opinion/anecdote is still valid (at least in the case of gun control).
How people feel is important to know because it will influence how a change needs to be presented.
In this example: A lot of oeople feel safer owning guns, science show they’re wrong and it actually decreases their safety, in order to be able to change things in a way that people will accept it that perception needs to be changed.
I could understand the argument for factoring people’s feelings into policy in some cases, but let’s take this study as an example.
Handguns are responsible for far more harm than AR-15s, but this study shows people “fear” AR-15s more. A policy that is based on these findings and not empirical data may attempt to reduce gun violence by addressing AR-15 ownership. Thereby not having a major effect on reducing actual gun violence.
A policy focusing on reducing handgun ownership would be much more effective at reducing gun violence, despite people not fearing them as much.
I think you’re confusing me with other commentors. I haven’t suggested this research in particular is being actively used to support policy decisions. Nor have I suggested this research is advocating for policy.
In my initial comment I simply said policy in general (at least with gun control) shouldn’t be based on people’s feelings/anecdotes.
I think this study asked a very interesting question, and I find the results to be very interesting. I don’t really have any issues with this research by itself.
Yes, people want to feel safe. Emotional health is an important part of quality of life.
And this isn’t a data-driven decision. This is a study on how people feel about an issue. Nobody is making a decision based on this, outside of politicians understanding the best way to speak in public when campaigning. Why are you so upset that someone studies how people feel? Yes, the study could have been more in-depth and asked about different types of rifles, but then someone would complain that they didn’t include X gun or Y rifle, or they would complain that they lumped all rifles together, or complain about the lumping of “assault rifles,” or complain that shotguns aren’t included.
It’s like turning right on red. It has been proven to be safer by tons of data-driven studies. But people fucking hate it when you are used to being able to turn and go about your drive when there is no traffic around.
The study isn’t about community safety or gun stats, they said the goal was to explore opinions. Opinions are therefore the data, the facts, of this domain. Are you seriously suggesting that researchers interested in opinions eschew opinions and use (barely relevant) stats instead? Because people don’t necessarily form opinions on facts. Which is why opinions are their own thing, and evidence is another thing. Two separate domains.
“80% of Americans think there should be more affordable housing in theory. 10% of Americans are willing to live near affordable housing.”
Given that hunting is a very common pastime in the US, and that hunting rifles are statistically the firearms least likely to be used in a homicide, I think you’d find that information to be a pretty useless outlier, on the level of asking about bow or fencing foil ownership.
A major reason many people buy an AR is because they think they are bad asses and want a bad ass weapon. I would rather have a level headed AR owning neighbor than a wanna-be bad ass neighbor owning ANY kind of weapon.
I have to agree. I know my neighbors have a few different assault rifles and it does not bother me at all. When shit goes down I know we got each other backs
What “shit” would have to go down to where you would need to have each others backs? You know your opponents are the ones that don’t even want to own guns… you don’t have to be terrified of us.
Why are you assuming to know who their opponents are? I’m pretty socialist leaning (union steward like, convince my friends to read the Communist Manifeso like) I own a handful of guns. I know my “opponents” are likely armed.
The Socialist Rifle Association is assuming their opponents will be armed.
We saw it during the BLM protests: the police are very willing to injure and kill unarmed protesters, but play very nicely when armed protesters are around. That convinced me.
TBF even if you don’t agree that the economy is getting better under Biden, that still doesn’t say anything about his fiscal policy. His policies might not have a tangible effect for a decade. He’s not a king, he doesn’t decide who sells what and for how much.
You’re allowed to say it, we will just downvote another brain dead violent revolution argument. History is full of proof on how well that tends to work out for your average citizen.
Jokes aside, the US Independence Movement was an organized restructuring of government into democracy that could have gone by peacefully if the then British Monarchy didn’t try to control them by means of force. The USA didn’t invade the UK and tear down parliament.
Yeah, but a better example would be if Texas seceded and see where they end up.
The deeper nuance here is that the relationship between state and federal, and between colony and homeland, is one of give and take. The British colonies started thinking “taxation without representation is theft” because they were giving and not getting much back. Nowadays, we pay taxes and in return we get representation, subsidized goods and services, a social security net, mandatory civil rights, and military protection. If we don’t like how this budget is established, our votes elect people who decide that budget directly and annually.
We get an illusion of representation by a bunch of wealthy individuals continually passing more laws to make running for office practically necessitate having a team of lawyers & advisors, a social security system that is constantly stripped away in favor of bailing out big businesses, subsidized goods & services by big corporations covered in layers of arbitration agreements, civil rights that are frequently violated with majority of attorneys only interested in representing those able to immediately pay their checks, and military protection that are some of the biggest abusers of human rights violations in history.
You say all that, but the GOP haven’t exactly been pushing rockstar career politician candidates. The barriers for entry seem pretty low, imo.
We could easily get campaign finance reform passed if we voted in like a dozen more people from the party who supports campaign finance reform as a partisan issue, but people don’t vote for that. It’s not that votes don’t matter, it’s that people are wasting them.
The prime examples of inexperienced or underqualified candidates like Joe O’Dea, MTG, Tiffaney Smiley, and Madison Cawthorn just happened to be GOP. Hell, the Trump appointed Secretary of Education literally bought her way into the position, and several Trump appointed judges had little to no experience in court rooms. I’m sure there are a few examples of DNC underqualified politicians, but the divide for Graduate Degrees in the 118th congress is D 73% and R 55%. This is a post about US Politics. It is a 2 party system. Even if you vote independent for congress, that Independent will choose which side to caucus with.
I don’t think that would hurt. I certainly would go further.
The point is that on the path we are currently heading, people will take any alternate system better or not. So if capitalism wants to in its own self-interest, stick around, then it’s going to have to throw the little guy some bones.
When people are desperate enough, they’ll look for any savior.
I’d prefer for the cases to get wrapped up before the election, but I’ll settle for Biden winning and the delay tactics all becoming moot as Trump reaps what he sows.
It might actually become a motivational point for both sides in this election for Trump to either see justice or skirt by it.
Northern neighbor here, thank you. I don’t want to see Trump back, but am also glad I don’t have to vote in your elections. Not that I hate Biden, but your Democrats make our conservatives look like Communists…
Not like they weren’t going to do it anyway. They’ll always use LGBT+ people and women existing and wanting to be full members of society as justification for whatever they pull.
O no, they changed the name of an organization I was never a part of and know nothing about.
I will now complain to every white stranger I come across.
PoV of white bald guy, they always think I’m on their team unless I’m dressed “flowery”. Then they just assume I’m gay and don’t talk to me. If I’m wearing camo tho? Best friend.
news
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.