jobgh

The severance that is paid out is money that could have been paid out to owners (him)

I bought the Lite plan back when it was $36/yr on sale and service has been degraded so hard that it literally unusable for coding. I've reverted simply using it to handle simple git operations here and there and using Codex or Claude for anything serious

Wish I could just refund the plan and use the money for API credit

I'd been trying to migrate from LR to RapidRaw, but it's been tough as most features are just trying to catch up to LR. DaVinci handles a lot of things better than LR from the start. Going to give it a go. Crossing my fingers

No shot. The economy is already in the gutter. The productivity hit of a total internet cutoff would be a death sentence

Just because we acknowledge an ambulance would break the rule doesn't mean we wouldn't break the rule anyways.

I've found that setting my phone display to grayscale has reduced my phone time by around 15% - 20%, with most of that reduction being in the YouTube, TikTok, and Twitter apps.

I still research topics for fun, but I actively have to Google for information and read wiki articles. It feels much more substantive, and I retain the information better.

I hadn't really calculated what percentage my life I've used up. This is so anxiety inducing. I'm realizing how much of my time I've wasted. I need to live more.

>I find it amusing that you dismissed this in a sibling comment as “just comparing spending to returns”… that’s literally what lobbying is: spending money to secure political favor. If our elected representatives simply agree that something should be a priority, companies wouldn’t need to bribe them to do it.

This is wrong. That's not what lobbying is understood to be. I think you're confusing lobbying with campaign contributions or PAC money. Lobbying is basically just advocating.

>I always assumed it was at least in part because there are a limited number of politicians competing with each other for the same funding sources.

That's kind of dodging the question. Why are there so few funding sources then?

*uninformed

Your first two sources are just comparing spending to returns. It doesn't address the hard question which is about causality.

A better explanation for The American Jobs Creation Act is probably the fact that republicans support lower taxes, and they won in 2016.

Regarding the Microsoft case with the IRS, perhaps the fact that everyone hates the IRS is a better explanation?

>Public preference has almost no impact on what legislation gets passed. Why would it have a significant impact? We don't pass laws by poll.

>Not to mention all the gerrymandering This one seems real from what I've seen, but I need to look into it more, and I don't think it should be tied very closely to money in politics.

Securing core resources has been a long standing national security concern for countries. Also, there’s a good chunk of populist isolationist sentiment in the zeitgeist.

Senators aren’t unbiased. They’re biased towards what their voters want. If they step out of line, they’ll likely get crushed.

I don’t think money in politics is very explanatory. It seems a basic understanding of the 3 branches and the interplay between the states and federal government explains a lot.

These stats are from likely voters, adjusted for voting power? And could you source your stats on civil asset forfeiture?

I'm getting throttled so I might not be able to reply in a timely fashion.

Do you have data to substantiate a strong majority of support for this bill among voters, and adjusted for voting power? I'd assume a lot of voters would be indifferent to this issue. It seems quite complicated. It seems it's a tradeoff between freedom and saving uniformed people from losing their money.

I'll have to look into it more though.