Confirming that you are simply wrong. There are a ton of high yield savings accounts, by mainstream banks, local credit unions and fintech startups, pick your preference; you can deposit and withdraw any amount any time and interest is calculated daily, paid out monthly. Rates are not fix, they have been hovering 3-5% in the past 10ish years.
I don’t see this in other replies, even though it’s incredibly obvious, so: insurance for most people comes as a benefit from work or from the government. So you get something, you take it. Your question only applies to those who are not eligible for any kind of subsidized health insurance, which is rare for those who could otherwise afford one.
Oh I know the response to this: you have to set up an agent team to triage the reports!
I understand why a team wouldn’t want to have anything to do with AI. I don’t understand why a user thinks software is compromised if they accept AI generated bug reports.
Got it, that makes sense.
I’m struggling grasping your logic. I am very far from being an AI fanboy but I’m also not a luddite.
So we have tools now that can pretty much autonomously scan through any accessible codebase and find new vulnerabilities that were not found before. And you say that’s not a big deal because anyone could have found those vulnerabilities if they looked?
Of course, that’s the whole point, nobody was able to attack at that scale before, and now many actors are. Your argument reminds me of what was common to hear 15 years ago when nobody secured anything: “why would I complicate my life with security, nobody wants to hack me! and if one day the CIA decides to come after me, they can get through security anyways!” True, until you have botnets scanning every ip…
You might want to look at the story about the Mythos model, apparently it is particularly good at finding vulnerabilities.
Another way to put it. If we decided, technically we could buy back all treasury bonds from the market with money that didn’t exist yesterday (see QE that I linked previously, also google open market operations). The debt would go to zero. There is literally no technical reason not to do this. But, that would destroy money markets and the exchange rate of the USD, so we would need to stop buying goods from other countries, which would stop the economy… so it would be a very bad move. But I just want to make the point through that US government debt is really not like your family credit card debt.
Not exactly. I talk about their relative growth, not their relative size. The debt doesn’t matter. There is no specific amount of debt, either nominal, or expressed as a percentage of gdp, that is definitely too much. This is because the USD is the global reserve currency and it’s issued by the federal reserve, which is part of the US federal government. Imagine you’re the bank in Monopoly, and you also own the monopoly money printing machine. There is no way you can’t pay for something in monopoly money, because you can just print more if you need more. That kind of devalues the existing money supply, but that’s a gradual effect, there’s no specific limit that this means.
I guess the bigger picture: money isn’t real. People need goods, services and infrastructure, not money. The country is prosperous if it can allow its citizens to consume goods, use services and depend on infrastructure. Whether the debt is 100 or 10 or 1000 percent of GDP, does not matter. What matters is if we can keep increasing the amount of goods we produce, housing we build, etc. Problem comes when those things slow down. The housing crisis, for example, in not primarily because of high interest rates (rates are not high and the crisis was already on when rates were historically low). It is because there are not enough houses being built in the places where it’s needed, due to shortages of labor and materials (and zoning, but that’s for another discussion)
Yes it does. The challenge of US monetary policy is to keep the economy (GDP) growing more than inflation. Dollars spent that are effective at increasing growth are good investments, regardless of the level of national debt.
Therapy (if we talk about talk therapy with a psychologist) is difficult, and takes a very highly trained and skillful person many many sessions to get a breakthrough. As sad as that sounds, these qualities make it expensive, and thus only available to those who have money or have access to a system that provides it (for which in most places you need to be a very severe case).
My impression is that it’s quite normal for a patient going in completely oblivious about the nature of their issues. If I were you, I wouldn’t expect the therapist to directly address the issue that I name as my top concern. I would expect them to start learning about me, finding out who am I and what my life was like, then identify the issue we need to work on, then gently lead me to discover it for myself. To put it bluntly, if you knew your issue, you wouldn’t need this type of therapy.
Having said that, it is very important to be able to trust your therapist and feel that you are in good hands, and it can take a few tries to find someone who works.
Meditation, exercise and sleep are very very helpful for mental health, but may not be all you need. Still, it’s good to make progress on these fronts as well, won’t hurt.
I wish you good luck and I hope you will find the help you need. It took me years of trying different approaches and things before I found a therapist who helped. The issue that I was seeking help for during all those years, was a surface level symptom and had nothing to do with my real issues.
Okay, but if it’s fewer than 239, then even with one more it will be fewer than 240.
Good explanation. The selling bonds part is optional, the federal government will always be able to service it’s debt because they can issue dollars through the treasury and the federal reserve. They don’t need a market to buy the bonds.
This thought is so deep I will drown in it. When do people stop posting it?
Poke the casing with a fork before cooking so they don’t burst.
Well, even if you don’t partake, there are trackers with subscriptions and they have subscribers.
There exists multiple types of people who upload pirated stuff. One of these types is the person who, instead of getting a day job, makes a living on selling content that they don’t own. I don’t know what to call that person other than a criminal. And it’s not too far fetched to assume that some people in that scene resort to pretty nasty techniques to obtain content, and that can be way more problematic than sharing torrents.
I love piracy as much as anyone, but I got to be honest, I am a bit irked by how much of a hardon you have for the amazing people who develop these beautiful tools in their free time driven by nothing else just an outbursting of love from their hearths. In reality, while I am sure there are innocent enthusiasts, many of the people who run private trackers, usenet servers, and I’m assuming are developing client architecture, are basically criminals who make a living off stealing protected IP and selling it to people who prefer a subscription for a tracker or server over a streaming service or over purchasing audiobooks, games, or porn directly from publishers. The arr stack is the infrastructure for hosting industrial scale streaming services using pirated content. So that’s part of the reason why the free piracy software is good. There is a very real paying market for it.
Edit: I’m putting a link here so I don’t sound like bullshitting. This is the type of illegal streaming I am talking about, which basically operates as an international organized crime group, with ties to other illicit activities independently of pirating. While I don’t know anything about their tech stack, they need a massive automated system to obtain the media they pass on to their subscribers. It’s not the need to organize the movie library of a middle age dad which justifies configuring a massive stack of services.
The reason why I don’t think there can be a definitive answer to your question is that wealth, infrastructure and healthcare can do a lot to mitigate the issues with deadly heatwaves.
In a region with no AC, no potable water, and no healthcare, society probably wouldn’t survive a week with wet bulb temperatures above 35C for more than 8 hours every day.
So if that happens in an undeveloped region, a lot of people die, but a lot do find some kind of relief that lets them survive. In a developed, industrialized region, like Arizona or Texas, you can have that kind of weather for months, and most people will just hate the heat but otherwise live and work normally. You could picture a hypothetical technically advanced civilization which exists in a climate that is persistently lethal to humans.
Places that face extreme heatwaves need to build countermeasures, but societies tend to be able to do that, even in the global south.
Considered trying socks or slippers?
Fuck you. (Just leaving a comment with the downvote so you and your thick skin don’t get offended by intellectual laziness)