Have the same card solely for the rental car cover. And to be fair it works, had an issue and they refunded the full expense without too many hoops to jump through.
Supposedly the free Chase cards have comparable rental insurance. The main difference is Sapphire is always primary insurance, but Flex and Unlimited become primary when traveling internationally and if you happen to live in a place that requires no car in the US and you don't have insurance, it becomes primary in the US too.
Not sure what the differences are when filing claims though.
I will say this, it seems like more and more countries are starting to require Third-Party Liability (TPL) insurance and the Chase cards don't cover that so you still end up having to pay out of pocket for partial coverage (Chase for CDW, TPL from the rental agency). Some rental places don't make it easy to split these out.
This is not correct. When someone with type 1 has an illness they can develop ketones while their glucose appears stable within range. This is can lead to death.
About once a year, when my son is sick, we need to monitor his ketones with finger pokes. When he has a stomach bug and can't eat, we have had to go to the hospital for a drip to allow us to give insulin and lower his ketone level. Having ketones on the CGM with glucose would have been very helpful.
When a young child with type 1 is sick and not eating or is vomiting, they are getting almost no insulin. My son's basal can be as low as 0.1U an hour. It's in these cases, where he has developed high ketones with glucose level around 90 mgdl.
It's not that promotions should be given out indefinitely but I think a pay raise in line with inflation should be the minimum, unless you are under performing. It's funny when a company excitedly shares a pay raise with you are it's below inflation...
Merit raises are typically based on market rates as a baseline. The employees' costs in terms of consumer price inflation are not a factor. If every employer gives out raises in line with inflation that also creates a positive feedback loop which contributes to higher and higher inflation every year (I do understand that's not the only thing which drives inflation rates).
If your wages are falling behind then look for opportunities in higher growth sectors.
As an employee I don’t care about the reasons that inflation exists, I care about getting the same real money over time (only counting inflation raises, not counting merit or other kinds). And citation needed about inflation raises driving inflation, there are much bigger factors that contribute to it.
No one is forcing you to care or to produce any particular level of work. If your job has no growth opportunities and stagnant compensation then you might want to look for other opportunities.
I think the issue here is that you're trying to frame the issue in terms of some sort of concept of fairness. But in reality that has nothing to do with it.
Because people are not perfect incarnations of idealized concepts. Employers are people who exist in society who have concerns beyond the bottom line. That many or well more than most employers have forgotten this fact is at the core of what is wrong with work, corporate America, and capitalism in general.
I always look at inflation when I get a raise. Or if they are skipping raises because of the economy - I compare to inflation. I accept that as a staff level engineer I've reached about the top of what I can make - but I still expect my income to match inflation, and I have left when it doesn't.
I think this only applies to certain segments of society. My child has type 1 so I'm active on Facebook groups for parents. The number of mums who say their partner is not involved really at all in their child's care is so sad. The child's own father can't supervise their child solo because they can't manage the care. And then the divorced parents. Oh boy...
"The number of mums who say their partner is not involved really at all in their child's care is so sad."
While that can be true, I wonder how much of it is true. It's pretty common in therapy to hear partners saying the other one doesn't contribute, but further investigation can often turn up observation biases.
Without proper statistics we can't know. But I do wonder why is it that if you spend any time on parenting websites you find lots of mothers complaining about deadbeat husbands, and so few fathers complaining about deadbeat wives. Purely anecdotal, but it is very lopsided, and it has made me wonder why is it.
I'm a dad, too. The lopsidedness could come from many places: mothers being drawn to parenting websites (marketing), women feeling more compelled to voice complaints online (if they are stay-at-home-moms, they don't have coworkers to chat with), women actually getting treated unfairly (very true... patriarchy), etc.
I've heard this from many moms, "My husband does so little in terms of housework, childcare, play and mental load, that it is actually easier when he is out of the house; when he is home, I essentially have to take care of an additional child." I even know some moms that organize playdates for their husband, as in ONLY the husbands, so that that the husbands are out of the house.
On the other hand, I know of two separate marriages that fell apart because the husband worked, did all the child care and housework, while the mom stayed home and doomscrolled. After a few years of no improvement, divorce. Of course many things could be at play here... screen addiction, post-partum depression, etc.
Raising kids is complex, time-consuming, hard, and amazing. It takes a lot of energy, people, and love. I always try to assume people are doing their best, though sometimes even that's tough.
You can see why men don't share often. The women get excuses (addiction, post partum, etc) and it's naturally assumed that men are dead beats. Probably not your intention but as one of those divorced dads I can tell you the bias is overwhelming.
It depends on the site but when I was a SAHD, I found many of those parenting sites were not welcoming to dads, even dads doing the exact same work as the moms. Moms there wanted a place to vent about their husbands and men who were pulling their fair share or were handling most of the parent duties simply weren't allowed.
This, it's well known that women want to vent and men want to fix the issue. This difference in communication and perspective has been supported in various research.
Yeah, seriously. Anyone with some experience in life understands that men and women are (on average) wired very differently, and this is one of the ways.
It seems like a safe guess that very few of the moms complaining about their partners on r/parenting are also married to the dads who are posting on r/daddit.
It's like how /r/steak is just dudes posting steak pictures, and there is some new cooking sub where it's just women posting food pictures and complaining about their significant others. Women be complaining.
> there is some new cooking sub where it's just women posting food pictures and complaining about their significant others
If you are referring to /r/girldinnerdiaries, that is not a cooking sub, nor is it intended to be. The whole point is pairing a photo of dinner with the situation and mood of the photographer.
It's right there in the name: Girl Dinner Diaries.
I'm not sure how serious you are about the dismissive "women be complaining" comment. A big part of your perception may be that women have more to 'complain' about; society is measurably unfair for women. Another part could be that when women voice their struggles it is called "complaining," and when men voice their struggles they are "being serious." Also, men get shot down for showing vulnerability and seeking support, so their struggles are internal. And this isn't always good for mental health.
My comment was descriptive, not normative. I’m not ascribing moral valence to it, just stating what’s happening and speculating why. For example, men probably complain less because men get shot down for showing vulnerability in public settings like online forums. Women probably complain more in public because they get sympathy. Whether one is good, or one is more mentally healthy, I don’t think either is healthier or unhealthier, but I don’t particularly care.
Being a deadbeat is defined as not paying. It's not about caregiving. These roles may not be equally distributed by gender, but then why is there not as much complaining by men about women not being equal partners financially? It's has to do with bias.
You can also find that much of the research about household duties is biased against the type of work that men have traditionally done (eg excluding yard work, maintenance, etc).
> But I do wonder why is it that if you spend any time on parenting websites you find lots of mothers complaining about deadbeat husbands, and so few fathers complaining about deadbeat wives.
My ex wife does this. I take my issues with her to a therapist (instead of online forums). FWIW I have always been more present than her in our child’s life and certainly pay a lot more too. One data point, but it’s in the population you’re referring to.
Some people want sympathy at the expense of their partner’s reputation.
That's the thing about trends in aggregate data. It tells very little about the details of any particular situation. There are almost certainly a wide variety of subgroups where this particular trend doesn't hold, and others where the changes are even more dramatic.
The data is reasonably reliable, at least in the view of the team that published the paper, and those who reviewed it. No one claims it is perfect.
And the post that started this sub thread was about how their experience didn’t show the trend. But no one in the social sciences expects every sample to follow the trend. There will be numerous exceptions. Just like sometimes when one rolls a pair of dice one gets a twelve.
That twelve is an absolutely an accurate sample from the data but just because one sometimes gets an outlier it doesn’t mean that there is no central tendency.
Exactly. This is not paid software. We assume full responsibility for outcomes when using it. There's a reason it's not on any app store. I'm glad features like this are being experimented with. Not how I would use AI to estimate carbs...
That's irrelevant to my point. Feel free to replace "selling" with "distributing" - my point stands: using an LLM to estimate carbs from a picture is a real use case that real software developers are suggesting to real people is a real solution. It's not some contrived idea that the researcher concocted to make AI look bad.
The GP, and much of the thread, is basically acting as if it should be obvious to anyone who is not an idiot that this is not possible to do precisely; and that the researcher just made up some use case that LLMs can't do and wrote a paper about it to disparage AI.
This post made the rounds on the open source DIY looping community in Facebook. In my opinion this isn't a good way to use AI to estimate carbs. Using AI to estimate carbs is just one of a large list of tools at our disposal including nutritional info, company websites, weighing with a scale, etc. Just taking a photo of a food with no other input isn't going to give good results. Taking a photo, along with a description including a brand name, an idea of size, a recipe url etc will do much better. My opinions as a parent of a type 1 child
