"There is no money in tying online activities to a real identity" is a hot take.

Excel works, the VBA macros with random business rules work, people with business knowledge know how to use it, the workflows are set up.

If we were starting from nothing it wouldn't be built, but the value of what already exists is massive.

I have a client who migrated from Sheets to Excel. Google has all the same issues Microsoft does too when it comes to privacy.

Wouldn't a high-return bet against Rory make sense? He was very likely to win.

Sure.

But isn’t weird the betting platform is sending an app notification saying “hey bet on this dude to win $X”?

How does the supreme court revisit precedents if the circuit court doesn't readdress the issue?

The party that wants the precedent reversed loses in the lower court (because the lower court is bound by current Supreme Court precedent) and appeals to the Supreme Court. The canonical historical example is Brown v. Board of Education, which was appealed to the Supreme Court explicitly to ask them to reverse Plessy v. Ferguson, which lower courts had relied on as precedent.

Somebody has to bring a new case that presents a novel legal theory/presentation that isn't clearly addressed by the ruling that forms the precedent.

Additionally, one can argue that the state of the world has changed enough that assumptions made by the USC at the time of precedence require reversal.

only in a new case ....

idk, they wouldn't have given the president nearly absolute immunity back then..

Yes, they are insincere "originalists". This is known.

> I gladly pay the (modest/token) late fees to help keep them open at this point

Keeping movies longer and paying late fees may be hurting them more than helping them. It's entirely possible that the late fees are underpriced to avoid scaring away customers. New customers going away disappointed they movie they want wasn't returned on time hurts them more than your late fees help.

Not keeping them on purpose, I’m just not sweating the fee because I’m happy to pay them.

Additionally, the odds that my kids are holding on to exactly what somebody else wants in that timeframe is very small. It’s a small shop within a larger co-op situation with a modest following and pretty substantial stock. I know for instance we’ve never had an issue of wanting something that was rented.

Has it happened? Maybe. But the fees I’ve paid probably net positive against that rare instance. They aren’t open half the week so I can’t return them once Monday passes for several days anyway. Owner certainly hasn’t expressed concern and has even waived the fee before because clearly it’s of little consequence.

I'm glad that it's not a negative in this case!

If the owner is waiving fees sometimes, then obviously they don't think it's an issue.

> all chip manufacturers would just collude to quit selling to consumers?

Well, someone with money could go buy 100% of RAM production for the next 3 years.

You sound like you are advocating for commutation, not pardons. Commutation lowers the penalty given to a criminal by executive decree (which the president can also do) A pardon makes it so the conviction never happened.

No, it doesn’t erase the conviction, it “forgives” you from the perspective of the government. Commutation ends the punitive aspect of the conviction.

I have a somewhat distant relative who was pardoned after being over-prosecuted by a zealous DA. They were a victim of a felony who did something in response that could have been charged as anything from a citation/violation to a felony, the DA’s discretion was to choose the harshest possible resolution.

They still have a hard time getting work because the conviction must be reported.

Thanks, I had misunderstood. It eliminates the legal consequences of conviction (unlike commutation) which is similar in a lot of ways, but it doesn't erase the conviction from the records.

A lot of advancement is multipurpose. CNCs are more accurate than machinists, computers are faster. And we have a lot of the technical knowledge written down.

Machinist never stopped working even after advanced CNCs proliferated. Humans had records of how things were made and yet new generations had to relearn it - and fail in the process.

This mission is not about sending stuff out to deep space. Its about sending out new generation of humans to deep space.

Even if you could guarantee that these new humans have exact same experience of past humans, can we guarantee that past decades simulations or theoretical knowledge acquired - while NOT actually doing something - will effectively reduce the chances of mortality?

It is interesting that Netflix alone gets blamed, as opposed to the parties they are negotiating with.

Netflix is ultimately responsible for what they put on the platform, for delivering a consistent product to their users, and for setting expectations.

Netflix is exceptionally shitty at letting people what is leaving their platform and when, and even letting them know when the shows they saved or were in the middle of watching have been removed. Netflix has been around for ages but we still have to depend on third party websites to tell us what's coming/leaving. Some items will have a "leaving soon" banner on the thumbnail, but that's only good for shows netflix decides to push at you. There's no section or search that will find all that stuff (searching for "leaving soon" will show you some of them)

They can only deliver things that are possible to deliver. There is nothing they can do to negotiate a forever licensing deal with a content provider, other than buying the content provider, which is also not possible unless they jack up prices 100x and somehow still keep all their users.

Netflix chose to negotiate revocable licenses to save money and draw in users, so it does seem valid to assign blame to Netflix for signing such contracts.