Weirdly on Reddit I keep getting the doordash and ubereats communities pushed at me - there is a very strong view amongst people using these apps that anyone who says they will "give a cash tip" will not actually do it, so it's probably not as beneficial as you might think.
The tips on the apps nominally do go entirely to the driver.
All that this does is ensure you don't get stacked with another order ahead of you (so the delivery is direct from the restaurant to the person who ordered) in theory.
It doesn't help with situations where drivers are multi-apping (accepting orders across multiple apps and juggling them). The drivers don't even know you have priority.
edit: and in the US where you can definitely see the tip up front, you will almost always find that the order will get picked up quicker if you increase the tip by the equivalent of the priority fee. But you may well get stuck with a delivery before yours.
Other than Amex for airline points I don’t spend a penny on banking, all the standard services (eg transfers, bill payments, cash withdrawals, deposits) are free (in the U.K.) with no monthly fee.
Lots of insurance covers these types of situation which are the result of careless acts...
Don't take the right safety precautions and burn down a customers house - liability insurance
Click on a link in a phishing email and open up your network to a ransomware attack - cyber insurance
Forget to lock your door and get burgled - property insurance
Write buggy software which leads to a hospital having to suspend operations - PI (or E&O) insurance
Fail to adequately adhere to regulatory obligations and get sued - D&O insurance
Obviously there will be various conditions etc which apply but I've been in Insurance a long time and cover for carelessness and stupidity is one of the things which keeps the industry going. I've dealt directly with (paid) claims for all of the above situations.
It doesn't absolve responsibility though, it just protects against the financial loss. I suspect if you leave a child alone with an AI and the house burns down that's going to be the least of your problems.
> Forget to lock your door and get burgled - property insurance
I’m pretty sure this will be the same for the other insurance you mentioned but for property insurance if you left your front door open you will have a hard time getting the insurance to actually pay out your claim. At least here they require a burglar alarm and they require it to be armed when nobody is on site or they will absolutely decline the claim.
Insurance insures against risk, but there’s a threshold to that and if you prove to be above it they will decline your claim or void your insurance in totality.
In the UK where I am, most standard (not budget) property policies would cover theft from an unlocked entry point.
Two main exceptions:
1 - if you are letting the property to someone else, e.g a lodger or have paying guests staying with you then this is typically excluded.
2 - if you have had previous theft claims, live in a high crime area, or you have a particularly high risk (e.g lots of valuables), the Insurer will add an endorsement that you need a minimum standard of locks and have them engaged when the property is unoccupied.
Outside of those, if you accidentally leave a door unlocked, your claim will likely be paid. The situation obviously may be different in other countries. I worked for a property insurer and saw hundreds of these claims (entry via an unlocked entry point) paid during my time there - I also saw many declined because of the above.
I suspect that over time the number of policies in the 'budget' category will continue to increase as price continues to trump everything else for most people]
edit: it is the same for the other lines I mentioned as well -e.g a cyber policy I saw recently has no conditions relating to use of MFA. It will have been factored in when writing the risk (they will have said they use it) and if it turned out it was a lie then there would be an issue with cover but if it was just a case of an admin forgetting to include an OU in the MFA group policy the claim would almost certainly be covered. Policies aimed at the SME space are much more likely to have specific conditions though.
> In the UK where I am, most standard (not budget) property policies would cover theft from an unlocked entry point.
How is this supposed to be assessed? You can demonstrate that a door was locked, if some kind of obvious measure was taken to circumvent it (destroying the lock, destroying the door, destroying the window...), but you can't demonstrate that it was unlocked. Burglars aren't limited to destroying things to bypass locks. One obvious approach is to pick them.
Most of the time we knew because people are generally honest and tell the truth. A few times where we had concerns we'd apply for a police report - even if someone will lie to their insurer, they rarely lie to the police in the heat of the moment when reporting the crime.
All that said, I can't recall many instances where the theft wasn't either breaking and entering, or entry through an open access point. As easy as lock picking might be, it's not a common burglary technique.
I have no idea who is underwriting your policies but this is absolutely not true with any carrier in the US that I've ever seen. Insurance pretty regularly covers being a dumbass.
I've never seen a residential insurance that requires an alarm system, let alone a monitored system. Though many carriers will offer a discount for having this.
> At least here they require a burglar alarm and they require it to be armed when nobody is on site or they will absolutely decline the claim.
Where is here? I'm not aware of that being common anyplace in the US. I'm guessing you're in some country where crime is significantly higher than in the US.
This sounds like a racket for residential properties. Alarms do nothing to prevent burglary. Where this is a requirement, I'm sure the insurance company gets kick backs from companies that make or install them. Or it's an easy out, designed to make it as hard as possible for people to get any value from their insurance...
Alarms usually don't prevent burglaries, but they often reduce the amount of theft, as the burglars take what they can do in one trip and leave, rather than comprehensively emptying the building/unit.
There is no insurance that will insure you against your own gross negligence.
Insurance will only pay out if you can show that you have done everything a reasonable person would be expected to do to avoid the loss/damage.
> Don't take the right safety precautions and burn down a customers house - liability insurance
You mean someone burnt a customers house down /because of something like an electrical or equipment malfunction that they could not have reasonably foreseen or prevented/, right?
> Forget to lock your door and get burgled - property insurance
> It's worth checking what isn't included. For example, damage caused by floods, intentional or criminal damage, or theft if you leave windows or doors unlocked.
Happy to be shown that I'm wrong but please do not give people the impression that liability insurance or property insurance will absolve them of losses no questions asked.
I don't think that's particularly true but even if it was, the site is overrun with crypto spam and porn bots that will drive people away. I know 3 people who have deactivated their account and switched to bluesky in the past week - and anecdotal evidence for many people on bluesky seems to suggest engagement levels are significantly higher. The network effects are really gaining traction as well.
I gave up on Twitter when I opened the app in public to find a porn video playing in the main feed, despite not following or interacting with any accounts of that nature previously. That was ~6 months ago and I haven't looked back.
I literally setup an alias last week in O365 Outlook using the pattern a.b@c.com? I’ve been able to receive and send using the alias as well. Maybe this is a new feature/behavior?
I may have misunderstood the parent comment - with gmail, you can add dots anywhere in the mailbox and it all goes to the same place (standard gmail, not workspace)
e.g andrew@gmail.com, a.n.d.r.e.w@gmail.com and a.....ndrew@gmail.com all are the same user and will go into their mailbox (which I have used to avoid the + stripping that some sites do)
andrew@outlook.com and a.ndrew@outlook.com are two distinct users.
Obviously if you control the domain or use a provider who supports it you can add an alias with punctuation but then you might as well just use e.g ebay@c.com to track the email source.
I'm fairly sure that most podcast platforms now include dynamic ad segments - I listen to a few and whilst some (usually where the hosts record ads themselves) seem to have static ads, others definitely have ads which are updated automatically
It's a shame - other countries' ads often strike me as quaint, hilariously awful, at best amusingly weird, and I'm willing to tolerate them to a point. But when an ad breaks in that's obviously targeted based on my location it feels ingratiating, dirty, offensive.
Yeah for sure. But is it being done for the huge back catalog of much older podcasts? Maybe the big players already have teams of people hunting for old ad breaks, but this could alleviate the burden.
But in that case, doesn't it make more sense for the government to just cut out the middleman and offer internet to consumers directly? What is the company's value-add?
The ISP company offers customer support, installation services and the fiber modem, and owns the equipment in the network closet that peers with the backbone.
They might even own the peering network closet (which is often a weatherproof enclosure with a backup generator).
I’m fairly sure it was confirmed they don’t have any standalone cyber cover so probably no insurance will be picking up the tab.
I work for a cyber insurer (who are trying to reduce the risk of compromise, alongside transferring some of the risk via insurance) - providing they’ve not been misleading in their application, we take the risk as we find it and can’t just not pay because of poor cyber controls.
I work in a related field (cyber insurance response) - typically takes a few months to identify exfiltrated data and then analyse it to understand what is in it. This might seem simple but there are usually in the region of hundreds of thousands to millions of files, and that may contain spreadsheets with tens of thousands of rows. This all has to be analysed, filtered and reduced to the point you have a list of PII which has been impacted, and can decide on what to do.
Credit monitoring is usually offered as standard when a breach occurs, the UK is much less litigation friendly than the US so in the absence of any actual harm, that would discharge most of their obligations to protect you following an incident.
Who decided credit monitoring was an adequate remedy for these breeches? I think I've accumulated three or four lifetimes of it by now, but it's never done anything but spew false alarms.
The tips on the apps nominally do go entirely to the driver.
reply