Pronouns: They/Them
It looks like the synthesis of those two seemingly contradictory things is: If Congress is still in session after the 10 day grace period for the president to sign it has passed, the bill is treated as signed and becomes law. However if the 10 day grace period goes by and Congress is no longer in session at the end of that period, the bill is treated as vetoed.
Another approach: Does nibbling on it count as a signature?
I’ve encountered IT departments with an unencrypted passwords.xlsx file that they store on the network. Not always super small companies too.
It did say so directly, something that I couldn’t find in a Google search because I was asking the wrong question, and getting forum posts with loosely related technical questions about LTO.
That’s not to say that it doesn’t just as often give weird answers, but sometimes those can guide me to the right question too.
I use Chatgpt 3.5 both personally and at work for tip of the tongue questions, especially when I can’t think of a word. Sometimes as a starting point when I have trouble finding the answer to a question in Google. It can sometimes find an old movie that I vaguely remember based on my very poor descriptions too.
For example: “what is the word for a sample of a species which is used to define the species” - tip of the tongue, holotype. “What is the block size for LTO-9 tape” - wasn’t getting a clear answer from forums and IBM documentation is kind of behind a wall, needed Chatgpt to realize there was no single block size for tape.
It’s excellent for difficult to search things that can be quickly verified once you have an answer (important step, as it will give you garbage rather than say it doesn’t know something).
God I hate the panic button on my fob (Toyota Corolla, 2005). I’ve never had any use for it, and accidentally press it a few times a month.
Beautiful work! Very kind thing to do.
Job elimination is a problem in capitalism because workers need jobs to survive. In a socialist society, job elimination can be a good thing, as it allows us to either increase access to resources or reduce how much time people need to work without dispossessing the people whose jobs were eliminated.
The difference is that, in capitalism, workers only survive by proving their usefulness to capitalists making money. Automation is thus a threat to worker bargaining power. If the means of production were socially owned (through for example government run utilities or worker coops), worker bargaining power is then through a vote or through ownership. It is possible to by default distribute the spoils of automation rather than concentrate them in the hands of capitalists.
The system rewards ownership, and owners sometimes are forced to distribute some value back to the creators of value to get that reward. Sometimes owners are forced to or benefit from sharing some ownership (like in the case of IP on YouTube).
It’s not unique to software, though the potential to infinitely copy software makes the relationship starker. For example owning a parcel of land is similar to owning a peice of IP, in that the creation/purchase potentially happens once, and rent can be extracted over time from everyone who utilizes it. The number of renters you can fit on a peice of software is theoretically infinite, but in practice limited by the number of potential customers, the availability of their attention, and your distribution Infrastructure, while the number of renters you can fit on a parcel of land is limited by its size and the structures on it.
Note that most owners did not personally create and do not personally develop what they own. Most software is not owned by programmers (who often make good money, but nowhere near the rent that is extracted from that software), and most homes are not owned by builders (who sometimes can’t afford the homes they build). It’s ownership which is primarily rewarded, and which spawns most further ownership.
I think they are saying that the model is flawed on a more basic level, since workers are the source of all value, and thus workers are the wine bottle. Of course trickle down economics is accurate if you view it as value trickling (or rather being siphoned) from the poor to the rich. Essentially refuting the ideology that views jobs as a resource that is provided for society by the rich, when the reality is that jobs under capitalism are workers creating value and the rich siphoning more than their fair share from the workers’ output and returning a pitance.