They effectively don’t do anything in most elevators in the US during normal operation. The ADA requires elevator doors remain open at least 3-seconds. Usually, people-moving elevators are most efficient when doors close as quickly as possible, so they start closing exactly at 3 seconds. I’ve used elevators with less common use cases — huge ones in hospitals, freight elevators, hotel service elevators — that might be configured to stay open longer than the 3 second minimum, assuming people will push the door close button as soon as they’re ready.
The whole point is in principle these things are good ideas but in practice they are tools weaponized by NIMBYs. This is the fig leaf that keeps them around. "But why would you do away with environmental review???" As if you were to stab 55 gal drums of toxic waste and dump them into a river. But really you were trying to build an apartment as large as many other existing apartments in the middle of the city. Or in this case, install something on the sidewalk.
Where the current Iranian government is slaughtering its own citizens. It is also fairly well known, and generally not disputed, that women, and non-binary people are slaughtered at whim, abused, even beaten to death in the street by the murderous Morality Police in Iran.
They literally fund recognized terrorist groups as well, and no one not even Iran disputes this. And yes, many Islamic and Middle Eastern states state so as well.
Yet there's a weird collection of people running around, screaming about how Iran is apparently immensely innocent of... well, everything and anything ever. I can only presume that any actuon the Trumo cabal take, is just immediately presumed bad.
Which is of course absurd. Even a broken clock is correct, twice a day.
And if you're non-binary, or support non-binary people, or if you are a feminist, you'd be insane to behave as of the current Iranian regine is "good" or "innocent" in any way. There isn't even the tiniest comparison to how you are treated in the West, or the US compared to Iran. In Iran, basically, you're dead, or rotting in jail until you die.
That doesn't make this war correct. But there is a vast difference between speaking out against military aggression, and supporting Iran. These are two different things.
Iran, the state is terrible. The world will be a far better place if it is replaced with a new regime. And no, that doesn't make the war right.
See how easy that is?
It's called nuance. Not black and white, binary thinking.
Ah well. It only takes one person to appear as 1000s today, so grain of salt.
There are dozens of equally "bad" regimes out there. The point is that invading them and/or killing a ton of their people is not the solution. Iraq: made things worse. Lybia: made things worse. Afghanistan: didn't make things any better. And this even before we discuss whether working inside a framework of agreed rules for international relations, instead of just doing whatever we feel like, is a good thing even for the "alpha nation".
Iran is obviously not innocent (nobody is), but their population is currently being hit for no particular reason beyond "Israeli vibes". That's not a broken clock being right, that's a broken clock telling the wrong time.
I think you're trying very hard to look for reasons to condemn people who think this war is stupid and illegal, under the pretension of gatekeeping what one can reasonably be opposed to what.
The main point remains: this war is stupid, illegal, and immoral. End of story.
Your response highlights how some are unable to live with the nuance of reality, and require black and white, binary viewpoints of the world.
I have said that Iran is a murderous, evil regime, while simultaneously saying war is not right here. I have said that my issue is with people trying to claim that Iran is a poor, innocent actor, instead of simply saying they do not agree with this war.
From this you infer weird things, simply because I presume you need Iran to be good, innocent, for the war to be wrong, bad.
Yeah, that's exactly what people against this war say, I don't know why your straw man them. Iran regime killed 7k people over a month and a half, and imprisoned 30k. Iran is almost at US level when we count population percentage in prison, and well, well beyond when we count execution, with an average of 600 a year (when Texas only had 600 in 50 years). This still isn't a great reason to declare war. MBS regime killed well over 70k over the last 14 years, and those are exhaustion death. His regime makes slaves work until death, which, in my opinion, is way, way, waaaay worse than dieing from a bullet, and has the same execution rate than Iran (a bit more). I still don't call for an attack in Saoudi Arabia.
And if the goal was to overthrow the Mollahs and the IRGC, why not wait for Khomenei natural death and avoid martyring him? The IRGC is tightly tied to the Khomenei clan, and no Khomenei main branch member is a Mollah, so the succession would have been a disaster under normal circumstances. The US war just robbed Iran a chance at a natural regime change.
Trump's crusade to save non-binary Iraninian feminists seems to be going quite badly. I'm not sure he planned it out that well. But it's the thought that counts.
I’ve spent dozens of hours reading about the conflict on social media. I don’t think I’ve seen a single western account, outside of schizophrenic conspiracy theorist anons, saying that Iran is some paradise that can do no wrong.
It really depends on the size of the unit I think. When you get over 50", it seems to me you can really tell 480p vs 1080p, especially if you watch lots of 2160p content.
If your TV is under 50", I don't think you'd notice quite so much.
This is where small claims court can have a HUGE impact.
Where I live, in small claims:
* Lawyers are not allowed
* There is no forced discovery. Sue John Deere, and they cannot ask for endless documents
* There is no way to assign costs on loss. If you lose, you never pay costs for the person you sued (which makes sense -- no lawyers)
* If you don't understand something, typically the judge will act as a mediator and explain it to you.
Yet meanwhile, suing in small claims will typically result in a big company using lawyers, who will try to pretend the above is not true. They will also rack up large costs for the company. In the end, sometimes a lawyer will appear in small claims court beside a company employee. However the company employee will do the talking.
My cost to file is $100. My cost to serve (via courier with tracking + sig) was $10. The company I went after, a fortune 500 company, I suspect spent >$50k on lawyers. While small to the company, it is truly a way to level the playing field.
What I find amusing here is, you could sue for a replacement unit. Explain what you found. Where I am, the max resolution is $30k, so you could easily get a refund for the tractor. Citing this issue while describing all of this, could result in two outcomes.
1) Deere employee claims (in their defense) that a batch of units were defective. They then deliver a fixed unit to you. While not perfect, it would be amusing, because they'll have just spent $50k in paying lawyers, along with making a proper unit.
2) You just claim that the tractor is defective, you can't sell it as it is, except maybe for parts. And you're not sure most of them are usable (weird electronics), and even cite that Deere stuff apparently is designed to break without authorized repairs. So how can you in good faith, even try to sell it to anyone??
So you ask for your time, costs, and full replacement costs with another brand.
Adding your wage/hr is somewhat typical here, for calls, research, sawing it open, all of it.
--
Anyhow.
If #1 is chosen and it breaks again, then you can repeat the whole fun process.
And I do mean it is fun.
$100 + I filled out a 2 page form, and then fedexed it to them. Their lawyers kept pestering me, to which I simply said "No" and "I don't need to give you anything, there's no forced discovery". This too was very satisfying, when I kept in mind how each call to me cost the company probably about $1k.
I mean, literally I'm sure each 5 minute call was around that ballpark. It was sheer joy.
(Just don't discuss any aspect of the case in these calls.)
Then there was a pre-trail meeting where I, the company rep, and a retired judge sat. I was told that "nothing said here can ever be used in court", which made it more fun. The system's attempt to resolve before trial. That too was fun, for I got to finally tell the company, over and over, how wrong they were.
>Then there was a pre-trail meeting where I, the company rep, and a retired judge sat.
This is them trying to intimidate you right? Or settle pre-court at least? Not part of the actual process where some retired judge always mediates before trial? It reads as gross.
Many small claims court procedures, at least outside the US, include mandatory mediation that would fit this description, and there is nothing gross about it.
Given that a "retired judge" was present, I assume it was such a mediation meeting (i.e. the retired judge was most likely a neutral, court appointed mediator, whose job is basically to tell both sides to please come to an agreement, and potentially tell one side to pull their head out of their ass and stop being idiots before the court has to tell them that they are being idiots).
Sounds like a fun anecdote and not doubting it at all. So just wondering how that max comes into play
> Explain what you found. Where I am, the max resolution is $30k, so you could easily get a refund for the tractor.
While I haven't bought a tractor before from some searching and impression they seem much higher. If fair market value is that low, I can see how 1) works but if for 2 it caps out at $30K, it doesn't seem like it would get you a full replacement with another brand.
The loss to John Deere is funny but isn't it also a loss to the customer, who would hurt more from the lost tractor?
The more people use chargebacks to get around black hole customer service the better, because it is difficult for companies to blacklist everyone. If they don't want to pay the mediation fee, they should provide customer service in the first place.
There's a misunderstanding here. I'll make it clearer.
The "Unless you're big cheese" is the company you're doing the charge back against.
If a company, such as Anthropic has too many chargebacks? Visa/MC can ban them from their network. It happens to smaller companies all the time, mostly because it costs Visa/MC + the banks involved to deal with each chargeback, and also, it's typically a sign of fraudulent behaviour.
Visa/MC are not a charity, or are payment processors. They need profit. Take it away by creating all this extra work, chargeback work, and they're not making money any more.
The "big cheese" part is, if you're amazon or google, things can be negotiated at that scale. Maybe they pay a larger settlement fee, whatever. And of course Google Play, or Amazon utterly dwarfs Anthropic CC activity at this point, even though they have a large valuation and potential future ahead.
Still, I have no idea what the background metrics and profit points are for Visa/MC, only that I've seen even medium sized companies have issues with too many chargebacks. And, we've all seen Visa/MC decide they don't like gambling, or porn sites and just drop them. Some of those companies were quite large and had a lot of flow for them.
So I don't think many companies will just use chargebacks as a support mechanism. That is, unless they're just completely incompetent.
Having equity doesn't mean they can buy it, and regardless, that doesn't mean Visa/MC will work for free, or the banks/payment processors. Too many charge backs from an account, and that's the result.
It's unclear how large their retail business is, which is why I mentioned that, and that's where you see most CC payments. Companies with any serious usage are going to pay via wire or bill payment via banks directly. McDonalds, for example, likely has a larger daily spend on cards.
10,408 by 5,408 pixels, or about 30" by 15" at 300dpi - but for this you'd want half that or less, so the result is large enough that the print is actually readable. Even redone to a less extreme aspect ratio, it would certainly fill a binder and probably cover a wall.
reply