Except H&R Block have offices in the EU and they, knowingly, serve EU citizens living in the US (and likely EU citizens living in Europe).
grahamsz
joined 2 years ago
If you buy eggs preshelled in the US then they are required to be pasteurized - something like this would be good https://vitalfarms.com/pasture-raised-liquid-whole-eggs/
In theory you can pasteurize an egg in its shell, but they aren't very common round here.
If i'm reading that correctly, it was one night of sleep deprivation followed by one night of good sleep.
I've always found that the night after an all-nigher I sleep really well and wake up feeling pretty rested and good, but interesting to see that apparently only happens for some people.
It is kind of a disaster for emergencies. Twitter is the defacto social network whenever any disaster strikes round here, the sheer volume of people, emergency services and the versatility of hashtags make it great for that.
I expect that instances will get more locked down, perhaps those of us on an instance can vouch for new users who might join, but I can't see how a volunteer admin could police a million user instance. I used to run a 10k user discussion site and while that wasn't a fulltime job it was still a giant pain in the ass at times. If we can get in a steady state where an instance has a core of active posters and lurkers then that seems better than infinite growth.
That then surely leads to federated instances that each represent the tolerances of their admin(s) and they presumably federate or not with other instances with similar sensibilities.
In the end the nazis will get their nazi instance and federate with likeminded types - they get defederated everywhere else and wont really be a problem (maybe for the FBI). (Though I'm not certain that all internet nazis truly are, i think there a group of trolls that get their kicks from being controversial and will get no joy by being surrounded by people who accept them)
The problems are going to be in the gray areas. For example, the argument that trans people don't deserve to exist... I find that abhorrent, but there are people who will happily say that on TV, and there are CEOs of $44B social networks that appear to agree. Some instances will tolerate that on the grounds of free speech and others will not, then the admins are left trying to decide what's grounds for defederation.
However in my limited experience, the thing that kills projects like this is too much navel gazing. There will always be some trolling and noise, but if the remaining users expend all their energy talking about it then the whole thing collapses in on itself. I feel like this is starting to happen on reddit where lots of subs are consumed by meta, but the best thing we can do here is get out and create active communities.
I think it's really a difference about whether you approach meat consumption as a moral issue or an environmental and social one.
I tend to agree with @Melpomene that any improvement is a good thing, maybe a better analogy would be in CO2 emissions. If we can convince 10% of people to bike to work one day a week then that'll make meaningful difference, and it's exactly the same from an emissions standpoint as taking X cars off the road.
Convincing someone, at least in the USA, to do without a car is fundamentally difficult, but convincing them to use it less is a significantly more accessible proposition.
Yeah absolutely, plus there's lots of space for new entrants with different ideas for what a hybrid platform might look like. Some of them will surely be terrible but maybe there's a magical do-it-all solution that we just haven't imagined yet.
Not having to recreate the community from scratch makes it so much easier for technologies to emerge
I'm also not sure the interface is quite right. There are maybe use cases where subscribing to a lemmy community or kbin magazine might make sense in Mastodon, but most of the time that feels like a weird use-case. It feels like I want to subscribe to my own feed of people who reply to me, then I could reply to them from Mastodon (except there's no real link between my identities, which is messy)
Generally, insurance companies aren't taking that risk. They can decline to renew your policy if they give you 120 days notice, so, for the most part, they are only insuring the next year.
This is all about the immediate risk of major hurricanes and the rapidly climbing costs of rebuilds. I know people in Colorado are really struggling to rebuild because costs have risen so much recently and insurance didn't keep up. I recently moved insurers (to Farmers, ha) and increased my rebuild amount by nearly 30%. That certainly came with a policy hike, but gives me enough that I have reasonable confidence I could indeed rebuild a comparable house.
I suspect there's also a risk concentration problem with some insurers. I've got to imagine they are looking at massive computer models of possible hurricane tracks and seeing scenarios where there's an outsized exposure. Still, what is curious to me is that they can't price it in as that's essentially the business that they are in. Would the required rate increase really be that unpalatable?