The article doesn’t say so but it might be part of bankruptcy proceedings or something similar. The company is sold off to pay debts but there isn’t enough money to pay everyone, debts are paid off in a legally determined order, and stock or option holders aren’t near the front of the line. I know folks who worked for First Republic and lost all their stock and options (and accrued vacation time, which is also apparently a debt) like that.

What a bizarre story. Toronto voters elect a city government in favor of bike lanes, then for some reason the premier of Ontario decides he knows what Toronto needs better than Toronto voters do, and now a judge decides that removing bike lanes is somehow unconstitutional because apparently the constitution is detailed enough to specify things like that. (Does this mean that it’s unconstitutional to have any roads without bike lanes, or is it just unconstitutional to remove existing bike lanes?) I drive, bike lanes piss me off, but they’re a local matter that should be decided by the local government.

I get permitting these blogs as part of a commitment to avoid censorship - someone with non-mainstream but far less extreme opinions can look at them and say “If Substack doesn’t censor even these guys, it definitely won’t censor me.” With that said, I’m still surprised that Substack apparently doesn’t manually curate its push notifications.

People decided to care about the ethics of fur farming after synthetic materials made fur obsolete. The majority isn’t going to object to the cruelty of factory farming unless they already have a replacement for factory-farmed eggs.

I’m not necessarily supportive of Thiel - he does some things that I oppose, and also some things that I think are silly. He’s not a very likeable man overall. I’m supportive of transhumanism. The substance of this article is merely that:

Peter Thiel hesitated when asked if he “would prefer the human race to endure.”

The article doesn’t even say what his reply ultimately was, but the implication is that even considering that a transhuman future would be better is somehow horrifying, and that’s the implication I’m surprised to see supported here.

Lemmy as a whole is more seems to attract neo-Luddites but I’m still surprised to see someone so against transhumanism in c/technology.

That man has the squarest jaw I have ever seen.

“Defending the free world alongside a European people is apparently already National Socialism for Hans Neuhoff. Neuhoff’s actions correspond to those of members of Putin’s party United Russia,” Schramm responded to accusations.

Quite a comeback.

So this is a matter of religion for you? Which religion is that, and which side are you on?

Are there currently any government contracts put at risk by this? I didn’t think that the feds were major spenders on AI. And is Trump aware that Musk is currently the one man trying to provide the sort of AI that Trump wants?

Does Jeremy Scahill have insider information about the negotiations which the major newspapers don’t?

the 20th century

Yes, that’s why I quoted the part where he also says it’s the worst in the last 50 years.

This is simply objectively false. For example, ten times as many people died in the Syrian civil war.

“There is no prior experience in my five decades of humanitarian experience that can come close to comparison to the horror we are all seeing in Gaza.”

This year is the 50th anniversary of the start of the Cambodian genocide. The Rawandan genocide was 31 years ago. This guy is either deliberately lying or an idiot.

It’s not unreasonable to simply dismiss what Trump says entirely, but it’s a different matter to assign it a meaning other than the meaning that can be inferred from context. You’re just putting words in his mouth at that point.

There’s a general concept in civil law that the plaintiff has an obligation to minimize damages, and therefore that he can’t sue for costs incurred due to his failure to minimize damages.

For example, consider a tenant who signs an agreement to rent a house for a year, but moves out (and stops paying rent) after only one month. The landlord may be able to sue the tenant for breach of contract: however, the landlord must mitigate damages by making a reasonable attempt to find a replacement tenant for the remainder of the year. The landlord may not simply let the house lie empty for eleven months and then sue the tenant for eleven months’ rent.

I’m far from a legal expert, so I don’t know if that principle doesn’t apply in cases like this or if the borrowers simply don’t have the resources to defend themselves in court.

I wish this wasn’t relevant as often as it is. It’s bizarre how so many Americans want to destroy America, meaning the present-day USA as opposed to some fantasy with the same name. They think they’ll be able to replace it with something more to their liking but they’re going to see that what they had was actually pretty good (amazingly good!) and that fixing things is a lot harder than breaking them was.

I think even China would prefer to see the USA not making climate change worse for everyone.

Maybe they intend to discourage it via red tape?

Apparently it’s supposed to be refundable when you leave, but also the government is not expecting to issue many refunds?

I’m surprised that such a tourism-crushing policy was not in the news (or at least not in the news that I saw) before the bill passed.

I still don’t understand how this is supposed to work even in principle. Clearly the sort of people who voted in the primary prefer Mamdani by a wide margin. Is Cuomo expecting to be elected by people who didn’t care enough to vote in the primary but do care enough to vote for him despite the fact that he’s not the Democratic candidate? Does he think that there are more people like that than there are people who voted for him in the primary but will vote for Mamdani in the general election?

I don’t understand the long-term purpose of a cease-fire. Is it an admission that Ukraine will not be able to retake occupied territory and an attempt to limit further losses?