In other news today...
-
@M_Adams said in In other news today...:
@mikehurley said in In other news today...:
Plus I've just gotten myself off of caffeine. And decaf seems like coffee for people who actually like the taste.
Oooh... I’d down vote that IIF I could down vote it so far your great-great-grandchildren would have a -1M reputation.
I don't quite understand how anyone could disagree with what he said.
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in In other news today...:
Wait, is that news if it's on Twatter?
First thing that came to mind is that slightly NSFW cartoon about Portal.
But the rings are the wrong way round....
-
@tharpa
The implication is that caffeinated coffee tastes bad in some way.
-
Bank and security
-
@TimeBandit said in In other news today...:
Bank and security
And lawyers:
Hackers used phishing emails to break into a Virginia bank in two separate cyber intrusions over an eight-month period, making off with more than $2.4 million total. Now the financial institution is suing its insurance provider for refusing to fully cover the losses.
-
@M_Adams said in In other news today...:
@tharpa
The implication is that caffeinated coffee tastes bad in some way.That coffee (whether de-caffeinated or not) tastes bad in some way to some people. This does not seem to be a radical assertion. People add sugar, creamer and flavors to cover up the bad taste. I drink black coffee - but I can't say I like the taste. If I wanted to give up caffeine, I don't think I'd drink decaf. If someone does drink decaf, it seems a reasonable guess that they actually like the taste.
-
@JBert said in In other news today...:
@TimeBandit said in In other news today...:
Bank and security
And lawyers:
Hackers used phishing emails to break into a Virginia bank in two separate cyber intrusions over an eight-month period, making off with more than $2.4 million total. Now the financial institution is suing its insurance provider for refusing to fully cover the losses.
Rather interesting. TLDR is that the bank had “computer and electronic crime” coverage with a single loss limit liability of $8 million, and "debit card” coverage for losses which result directly from the use of lost, stolen or altered debit cards or counterfeit cards, with a single loss limit of liability of $50,000 and an aggregate limit of $250,000. Because the hackers ultimately used debit cards to withdraw the funds, the insurer is claiming that the claims fall under the debit card rider instead of the "computer and electronic crime" one, and furthermore that the two breaches 8 months apart (but thought to be by the same people) only count as one incident.
As the comments noted:
Note to all Hackers: quit the tedious computer cybercrime business, start your own INSURANCE and indemnity business.
This illustrates a major problem with cyber insurance. [...] It’s laughable to consider the 2016 and 2017 incidents a single event[...] but then again, the difference between $50,000 and over $2,000,000 can pay for a lot of hours of legal representation.
-
@Scarlet_Manuka said in In other news today...:
the insurer is claiming that the claims fall under the debit card rider instead of the "computer and electronic crime" one, and furthermore that the two breaches 8 months apart (but thought to be by the same people) only count as one incident.
Insurer tries to avoid paying liability. News at 11
-
STOP TALKING HERE WHILE JEFFING IN PROGRESS.
And resume.
Late replies to this will probably just get deleted.
-
TeslaApple issue a software fix
-
@tharpa said in In other news today...:
That coffee (whether de-caffeinated or not) tastes bad in some way to some people.
There are two logical reasons for drinking coffee: taste and caffeine. If you're drinking it without caffeine, it's logical to assume you like the taste. As for me, if I'm so desperate for caffeine that I'm willing to drink coffee to get it, by the time I've added enough cream and sugar to swallow it, I've diluted the caffeine to the point I might as well drink tea, which I enjoy, rather than the coffee, which still tastes vile.
-
Dungeons and Dragons as an e-sport? Huh.
-
@TimeBandit
That's actually both kind of plausible (Intel server boards require configuration & licensing before they'll work properly with the fans of the chassis you connect them to) and completely implausible (said fans run at POST Jet Engine levels 100% of the time until you complete the configuration with the server board).It seems absurd to me to suggest that Intel goes to the opposite extreme for their consumer product, thus causing thermal throttles because the fans aren't running until they're licensed... but then again, Intel...
-
@izzion said in In other news today...:
It seems absurd to me to suggest that Intel goes to the opposite extreme for their consumer product, thus causing thermal throttles because the fans aren't running until they're licensed... but then again, Intel...
Apparently Reddit thinks it something to do with power chips or something something war in reddit...
-
@HardwareGeek said in In other news today...:
There are two logical reasons for drinking coffee: taste and caffeine. If you're drinking it without caffeine, it's logical to assume you like the taste.
False: It also has a stimulative laxative effect.
-
@boomzilla That is true, and I thought about going back and adding that as a third reason, but mobile . Also, does anyone actually drink it for that reason? (Yes, no doubt somebody, somewhere does; people are weird.)
-
@HardwareGeek said in In other news today...:
@boomzilla That is true, and I thought about going back and adding that as a third reason, but mobile . Also, does anyone actually drink it for that reason? (Yes, no doubt somebody, somewhere does; people are weird.)
You don't have to drink it for the laxative benefits.
-
@mott555 I have multiple reactions, including:
- I did not need to know this.
- Why?
- So that's why it tastes so bad.
-
@HardwareGeek It's a shame the OneBox didn't show the entire article title. Having "(With Pictures)" in the title was part of the humor of posting it.
-
Well, they’d have to I guess.
Personally, I’ve not yet found decaf that doesn’t taste weird to me. I love 💕 my coffee to be as black and bitter as my soulBut then again, I formed my “taste” for coffe in the military where it doubled as rust remover so YMMGV ¯\(ツ)/¯ .
Edited due to fucking apple smart quotes.
-
@HardwareGeek said in In other news today...:
@boomzilla That is true, and I thought about going back and adding that as a third reason, but mobile . Also, does anyone actually drink it for that reason? (Yes, no doubt somebody, somewhere does; people are weird.)
I've no doubt. It certainly plays into my decision to drink it or not at a particular time, depending on what's going on later. I do like the regularity that it encourages.
-
@mott555 Eww.
-
@M_Adams said in In other news today...:
Personally, I’ve not yet found decaf that doesn’t taste weird to me.
I love the taste of caffeinated coffee, but I don't really care for the taste of decaf. And yet they taste about the same to me in an A/B test scenario, which means the difference is entirely psychological.
-
@M_Adams said in In other news today...:
@tharpa
<abbr title=“...May Greatly...”> YMMGV ¯\(ツ)/¯ .Smart quotes are great, aren't they?
-
@HardwareGeek said in In other news today...:
@boomzilla ... . Also, does anyone actually drink it for that reason? (Yes, no doubt somebody, somewhere does; people are weird.)
And some people are so full of shit, they should be drinking it for that reason
-
-
@Scarlet_Manuka said in In other news today...:
@M_Adams said in In other news today...:
@tharpa
<abbr title=“...May Greatly...”> YMMGV ¯\(ツ)/¯ .Smart quotes are great, aren't they?
I even have the abbr tag as a kb replacement macro on this damn iPhone with the correct type of quotes, and autocowreak just has to fuck with it
-
@boomzilla said in In other news today...:
The city of Santa Barbara has passed an ordinance that will allow restaurant employees to be punished with up to six months of jail time or a $1,000 fine for giving plastic straws to their customers.
Oh, and each individual straw counts as a separate infraction, meaning that if someone got busted handing out straws to a table of four people, he or she could end up facing years behind bars.
-
@JBert That seems primed for a lawsuit. Something about disproportionate punishments...
-
God dammit Nintendo I thought you had changed your ways.
-
@JBert California laws are amazing.
Breaking into the country and forging government documentation:
Giving someone a plastic straw:
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in In other news today...:
@JBert That seems primed for a lawsuit. Something about disproportionate punishments...
I'm sending you for reeducation:
-
@boomzilla Jokes on
youthem--I work in education. And since we often have to repeat ourselves, I'm the one doing the re-education.
-
-
@Boner said in In other news today...:
That's a bit of a misleading headline, it's really 'Unhappy marriage not grounds for expedited divorce'.
I'm kind of OK with this one. Marriage is supposed to be a binding commitment, just being bored with one is not the best excuse for having it dissolved. The five years after separation is a bit long though, maybe 2 years would be better.
-
@Cursorkeys said in In other news today...:
I'm kind of OK with this one. Marriage is supposed to be a binding commitment, just being bored with one is not the best excuse for having it dissolved.
I'm not. If one person is unhappy with the arrangement, they should be able to get out without the other person's consent. And that within reasonable time. Reasonable, IMO, would be more around 6 months, simply because that's what bureaucracy will end up taking anyway.
People dump each other all the time, with less notice. If it gets as far as one person actually doing the paperwork for filing a divorce, then that should be it, more or less.
-
@cvi said in In other news today...:
Reasonable, IMO, would be more around 6 months
Going to have to agree to disagree on this one.
@cvi said in In other news today...:
People dump each other all the time, with less notice
I don't believe in the religious side, but on a practical level marriage give you huge tax and pensions benefits plus many special legal privileges. In exchange people shouldn't view it as something like a Prime membership and the law enforces that.
Divorce (this specific kind) is supposed to be the final step when all other options have been exhausted.
-
@Cursorkeys and making things easier makes them more frequent (on the margins). And divorce (even amicable divorce) screws any kids involved. I see them all the time--
- Children who, even though their parents get along, are bounced from one house to the other so they never know where their stuff is or have any stability
- Children who are used as bargaining chips/weapons against the other (former) spouse.
- Children who are left thinking that they're to blame for their parents breaking up.
While divorce is (generally) better than staying in an abusive relationship, most divorces aren't due to such issues. Most issues can be worked out if both parties are willing to put in the effort. Lowering the barriers to divorce decreases (on the margins again) the willingness to put in the effort.
-
@Cursorkeys said in In other news today...:
Going to have to agree to disagree on this one.
Yeah, fair enough. :-)
@Cursorkeys said in In other news today...:
I don't believe in the religious side, but on a practical level marriage give you huge tax and pensions benefits plus many special legal privileges.
On one hand, I'd be happy with removing most of those benefits to begin with, but that's maybe another discussion. On the other hand, getting a divorce means losing the benefits that one previously had, so that's already weighting against the decision to get divorced.
But being forced to remain in a marriage makes it impossible for one of the partners to truly get away from the other one, even if it's just for legal stuff (like taxes).
Divorce (this specific kind) is supposed to be the final step when all other options have been exhausted.
Are frivolous divorces really that much of a problem? (I don't know, but I kinda doubt it.) Besides, in the article it sounds like the 5 year limit is only when one of the partners files for divorce without the support of the other; it sounds like if both agreed to the divorce it would be a much faster process.
-
@cvi said in In other news today...:
Besides, in the article it sounds like the 5 year limit is only when one of the partners files for divorce without the support of the other; it sounds like if both agreed to the divorce it would be a much faster process.
That's exactly right as I understand it. If the other partner had done something wrong though it can be done unilaterally very quickly, this slow track is only because there's no compelling reason and the other party doesn't want to.
-
@Cursorkeys said in In other news today...:
@Boner said in In other news today...:
That's a bit of a misleading headline, it's really 'Unhappy marriage not grounds for expedited divorce'.
I'm kind of OK with this one. Marriage is supposed to be a binding commitment, just being bored with one is not the best excuse for having it dissolved. The five years after separation is a bit long though, maybe 2 years would be better.
(From memory) Thing is, she's the one who committed adultery, and apparently the reason (cited) for her wanting the divorce is her husband's unreasonable behaviour (he doesn't want the divorce, and denies the behaviour which, it seems, she cannot prove to the court's satisfaction.)
-
@Cursorkeys said in In other news today...:
this slow track is only because there's no compelling reason and the other party doesn't want to.
To me it just seems like one party wanting to get out is a more compelling case for expediting procedures than when both are agreeing that they want to end it.
-
@boomzilla Actual fucks to hell.
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in In other news today...:
@Cursorkeys and making things easier makes them more frequent (on the margins). And divorce (even amicable divorce) screws any kids involved. I see them all the time--
- Children who, even though their parents get along, are bounced from one house to the other so they never know where their stuff is or have any stability
Yeah, at least one of my big kids couldn't wait to go to college so she didn't have to travel between 2 houses any more and not appear to choose one parent over the other.
She ultimately dropped out and moved back home...and she did choose one.
Though I used to joke with my husband that I wanted to get pregnant by someone else in order to share custody so we would still have some kid-free time.
-
@Karla The number of times I've heard "it's at my Dad's/Mom's place and I won't go back until <day>" from kids...some are just excuses, others are serious. It's a major source of stress, not having a stable place to stay. Or stable rules and expectations. It's kinda heartbreaking.
-
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in In other news today...:
@Karla The number of times I've heard "it's at my Dad's/Mom's place and I won't go back until <day>" from kids...some are just excuses, others are serious. It's a major source of stress, not having a stable place to stay. Or stable rules and expectations. It's kinda heartbreaking.
We lived close (walking distance--as was required by the divorce agreement) and my in-laws' apartment was in the middle (they spend a lot of time there as well).
My husband always did what he could if things were forgotten at one house or the other.
-
@TimeBandit Do they have the same subcontractor dealing with maintenance on that thing still, or does it have its own?
-
@Gribnit You have the strangest questions.
I don't know the answer
-
Pushing territory, but: