It’s not mysterious and amorphous. We have seen the results with social media for what? 15 years now? This is a known issue with clear parallels. And health data is way riskier to have floating around.
I have chronic back pain that everyone knows about. It's not a privacy issue for people to know about it, why would it be? Genuinely don't understand how that gives a shadowy cabal of information brokers leverage over me.
That's obviously a take from someone who never suffered chronic pain. If you have a life-long mystery illness that doctors don't care about, obviously you're going to give your data to ChatGPT Health because at least, it looks like it's listening...
You have no clue what my medical history is and I will not be sharing it. Clearly you have an axe to grind. You refuse to try and actually discuss this topic without assuming you have the high ground that you’re depending on to spike any attempt at conversation.
How do you measure productivity? Profit per employee has never been higher, probably, as PE and other rent-seeking leeches (residency caps) have wrapped their fingers around the throat of the industry.
Positive outcomes per patient is probably also higher, due to research and technology advances. So many lives saved that would have been written off just a decade or two ago (e.g. spina bifida).
But I agree with you that there’s a hypothetical universe where seeking healthcare as an American doesn’t suck, I just don’t know if “productive” is the right word to describe it.
We don't know what the law is. The rules were created with an administrative procedure backed by a very generic statute which is likely unconstitutional. Neither the Supreme court (Cassazione) nor the Constitutional court have ruled on the matter yet.
Getting a fine is the first step towards further judicial review, probably.
And he is more than welcome to do so. The services provided by Cloudflare can easily be replaced by more local providers that have no problem complying with Italian laws. The takedown might not happen within 30 minutes, but there would still be action and a response to a report from the authorities. Italy and Europe do not need the arrogance of those who believe they are above the law by virtue of a freedom that is used only as an ideological shield. As if Trump were really the champion of freedom, right?
This is why Target self check out is the best. They have confidence in their theft deterrence so their machine has a lot of leeway and yells at me less for weight issues.
Thats the risk right. If a cashier makes a mistake and doesn't scan and item, nothing happens. If you make the same mistake, you could be hauled off to jail, prosecuted, lose your job. Why put yourself through that risk. Its common enough, that its probably happened to you that a cashier has missed a scan.
> its probably happened to you that a cashier has missed a scan.
It has, a couple of times (that I noticed). It's a hassle because it meant that I had to return to the store to pay for the item that was accidentally skipped.
It's impossible to prove or falsify of course but lower cost to them from having to pay fewer cashiers in theory shows up for the customers in lower prices. The other benefit is self checkout usually crams more lanes into a smaller area so you can checkout more quickly than waiting for the 2 lanes at best I'd often see staffed outside of peak seasons before self checkout.
So do big box retailers and grocery stores not have any competition then? I don't want to be snarky but it's not exactly a mono or even duopoly space in most towns for grocery stores and big box retailers are more often single choices in medium and smaller towns but above that you've often got a choice of big box retailers to go to too.
Since WalMart and dollar stores compete in the same space to some extent they have competition. And most things you buy at target can be bought from smaller specialty stores that while not direct competition between them all you have same same variety of things available. (and different prices and quality levels so you can make your own trade offs)
I can check out faster by rarely having to queue for the register, and I can scan things faster than a tired bored retail worker and know it's accurate. Self-checkout is also much less likely for me to catch a cold/flu/etc. as I'm neither in close proximity to the employee who was in close proximity to every other customer that week, and is touching every one of my items after touching every other customers' items. And, I can bag the goods the way I want them bagged, either for easier carrying, cold items together, or for how I want it organized to un-bag at home.
So, I consider self-checkout a real plus, not them stealing my labor. The exception is when the system is ill-designed or ill-tuned, so it halts and I'm effectively debugging it for them, except nothing is fixed b/c the employee just logs in and waves it through. With that exception, I still much prefer self-checkout.
I am unsure what you are trying to say here. But if you mean to refer to "market distortion", I cannot see how that can be happening.
The reason is that these rules are supposed to be applicable universally to every company in the same way. And as such, they do not create any market distortion in one way or the other. Because everyone has to play by the same rules. Those are as fair market conditions as one can get, in my opinion.
> some might not bother
Why should that be a problem? If someone does not like the regulation in a particular jurisdiction, it is fine. No one is forcing them to operate there.
The main point is the following: If they want to operate, they have to play by the local rules. Just like everyone else.
Ad skipping should be handled at the platform level and not left to individual advertisers to control. Regulations like this make such an outcome more likely.
Mobile ads in the US are heinous. Each one has a different mechanism for skipping, the skip buttons are micro sized and impossible to tap, some of them don't even work.
Standardization should have been up to the platforms selling ads, but they haven't done it. It's past time for local authorities to step in and protect consumers from predatory behavior.
Markets are not a natural phenomenon and are themselves the result of complex social arrangements, involving coercion. So, the market is the result of "distortions" before and after various regulatory measures.
Simply put, fuck the "market" (aka: uber-rich people). The market should serve us humans, not the other way around.
Ive heard this garbage excuse since Reagan took a wrecking ball to regulations. Not making effective regulations is ALSO a market distorting thing, that encourages the absolute worst behaviors. And now with Citizens United, its $1 = 1 vote.
In marketing their is a distinction between direct response ads (get people to take action) vs brand ads (force people to just watch, no immediate action needed).
Unskippable ads are almost always brand ads focusing on total view time.
reply