By the letter of the law the guy fixing his car should be prosecuted, but like nobody is going to know and it’s not going to happen. In this case it’s pretty obvious the law was broken.
Look! A guy built 95% of slack in 2 weeks! Very skeptical of that btw, but also an organization that justifies every single team by exactly how much $ value they’re generating sounds like hell. How would you ever innovate or try out new ideas? It’s important to quantify what impact your team is generating but there are some cases (e.g. UX) which are really hard to quantify in $ but are still very important for the product
I think addressing climate change is more of a policy issue. I think most people are onboard with addressing climate change (modulo some cranks who are open to idea that the earth is flat and oil company ceos ig). It just doesn't translate into policy due to corruption.
I read the tests, it also is really really good to have Claude verify that removing the changes in question break the tests. This brings the quality way way up for me.
Bro nothing is verifiable, you have to make a call in the end or you can just sit here and be like “oh but what about the speck of sand on the body, GOTCHA”. I used to be like you trying to poke holes in every little thing, but 1 it’s annoying to everyone and 2 you have to eventually take a stance other than “every stance is wrong” your mystical perfectly evidenced war crime is never going to exist, congrats! What do you think actually happened here? The article cites plenty of evidence, eyewitness testimony, make the call. The IDF themselves said they killed them. It’s a family, what do you think justifies that?
Nothing is provable in a mathematical sense sure, but as evidence goes, anecdotes are a very weak form of it. People sensationalize and make things up all the time. It's not that high of a bar to want better evidence than that.
Seen this on repeat lately - there will be some war crime that the IDF commits, soldiers or Israeli citizens celebrate it themselves in a TikTok or in Israeli media, then the US media will argue that it didn’t happen or “there’s some information missing”. It’s actually kind of nuts.
That’s 100% insider trading. If you use material non-public (including confidential) information to perform the trade it’s illegal. Paying someone to provide confidential info is still insider trading. Paying someone to observe planes (public information) is not insider trading. Researching using publicly available information (even though you don’t share your research) is not insider trading. The key point is the channel from which you receive the information.
The distinction isnt public private information.
If I am a farmer and I know harvest will be poor, buying futures isnt insider information. I pay to conduct a confidential survey of farmers, that still isnt insider trading.
reply