For anyone wondering, this doesn't actually work, because the bananas will realize they are upside-down.

The complete rules are here: https://www.transportation.gov/airconsumer/refundsfinalruleapril2024

The meat of it is the table on pages 9-14 and mostly comprehensible.

Worth noting:

• A change to your flight number is always a "cancellation" and you may choose to accept a refund
  • The expectation is most people would not, for the same reason most don't cancel their refundable tickets - they want to go on the flight
• There are no carve outs for weather, etc.
  • I am really glad to see this because airlines could claim "weather" for connecting flights, so any weather anywhere meant they could delay your flight

Humans have honored the dead since before homo sapiens. Laws can be complicated, contradictory, and confusing; respecting the dead is clear and primal.

Yeah, this probably won't change a lot of minds, but some folks will see there is something wrong about a man who would dishonor the dead to celebrate himself.

I oppose beef subsidies, but the unsubsidized price seems entirely fabricated. How can $38 billion across 80 billion pounds of meat and 25 billion gallons of milk make hamburger $25 cheaper per pound?

Surprised not to see any posts referencing the Arbitrary List of Popular Lights or ![email protected].

One of the requirements to make it on the list is:

A user interface where a single click turns the light on in a reasonable mode, and another single click turns it off.

I'm surprised there's no flag on the inner flag

NHS to discontinue delivery of babies until double-blind study is done vs just leaving it in there.

Funny running across this article after reading https://www.wheresyoured.at/the-men-who-killed-google/

Spoiler: the author does not have a high opinion of Raghavan.

This seems entirely opposite to my observation. I'd say Biden and his administration are unusually focused on unfair or annoying business practices. In just the past two weeks the Biden administration:

• Set clear rules requiring cash refunds for flight delays
• Banned non-compete clauses
• Set new rules on "junk fees" for credit cards
• Increased the minimum salary for overtime exemption
• Expanded fiduciary duty to retirement "advisors"
• Announced a lawsuit against Live Nation (TicketMaster)
• Re-instated net neutrality

Headline is an outright lie. The article literally quotes her saying she supports IVF. The author speculates that a bill she is co-sponsoring (that does not mention IVF) may accidentally ban IVF (if it passes and Biden signs it).

Certainly you could denigrate her intelligence, performative politics, or the logical incoherence between her abortion and IVF positions. But you cannot say she wants to do something contrary to her actual explicitly stated desire.

That's like 30 people in line. It takes half a block and a lane of the stroad to fit 30 people.

All the more reason to be for legalizing immigration and against illegalizing immigration.

Focusing on the immigrants rather than the system puts the blame in the wrong place, and obfuscates solutions to the problem.

What she said was "I think we can certainly do more to be advancing our vision, and I believe we have a strong vision that we can run on." She specifically calls out:

• Codifying abortion/reproductive rights [House and Senate races matter!]
• Lowering Medicare age
• Student loan forgiveness

Contrary to OP's title, she actually pushes back on the false narrative that Biden is running as "not Trump".

She does say that it will be important to demonstrate "what we are willing to do with" governing power between now and November.

Those "richest people" lists are based on publicly known wealth, which is almost exclusively public stocks. There is a lot of dark money out there.

Actually it's not limited to 1.8 billion dollars. It's a completely blank check. You can see the settlement here: https://www.justice.gov/opa/media/1441201/dl

So frustrating seeing all of the "news" platforms parroting the regime's claims as if they were a trustworthy source

🎵 Mister every ounce of beer is precious man 🎵

If there was a government-mandated monopoly on coffee and it was sold in L/s, we probably would.

I think transforming "it's possible to think without language" into "language is not a tool for thought" is an overreach. Definitely a lot of our internal voice is post-thought, but crystalizing those thoughts into words can provide footholds for further thought. Some would argue it's not possible to think through a complex issue without writing:

• https://paulgraham.com/words.html
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtIzMaLkCaM&t=312s

And through the whole thing she's using her submissive wife voice https://jesspiper.substack.com/p/the-fundie-baby-voice