That's 2 if's. Sure, IF both of those things were true, maybe it would net out, but still be a paperwork and cashflow delay for the company (pay the duty today, get the money back at some point in the future) which sucks liquidity out of the market and generally holds back growth and investment.
But that isn't particularly relevant since neither of those two things will ever happen. The tax cuts will go to the top earners, and retaliatory tariffs are very much a thing and cannot be ignored.
In the display that TSA agents are given, the image is no longer shown and instead the system shows an outline of a body with the questionable area marked. This was added after the aforementioned outrage from travelers so that every TSA agent didn't get an x-ray view of your naked body. The scanners are the same, but the agent doesn't see it anymore.
To hopefully help anyone out that buys eggs at Costco like I do:
108 days of the year fall in that end-of-the-month window where they belong to the astrological sign associated with the month that follows, so almost 30% of all possible birth dates become harder to guess. (Your comment made me curious as to just how significant this variability could be in practice - a lot more than I would have guessed)
That would be a bad idea if the "correct" option is available. This is a DoB check without actually displaying your real DoB on the page, which could be used as PII verification by a malicious actor. If the correct astrological sign is listed and you say "Does not Apply", it will count as a wrong answer.
Crappy way to do this, but they're trying to walk a line between confirming your identity (or at least that you know the sensitive data of the person you're spoofing) with multiple choice questions and not creating a security vulnerability where someone can leverage their site to compile sensitive data on individuals.
*Second best army in Russia
I understand your viewpoint, but don't subscribe. Voting isn't about supporting a system. The system exists, with or without your participation. Shy of a full blown civil war (which is more likely to make this worse than better), the only way to change the system is to use the system to change itself. The general election in November every 4 years is the last stage of a long process that starts with local parties and elections, weaves through the primary process, and culminates on election day. We need more people that are dissatisfied with the candidates to get more involved, not less, and to go to the early phases where a smaller number of active participants can have an outsized impact on the whole system. To me, one of the many alternative voting systems would be a huge improvement (I have preferences, but honestly just about every one of them is better than the First Past the Post system we use), so advocating for that and supporting local candidates that can push those ideas forward is where my energies go.
Both parties actively try to give voters from the other party reasons to be dissatisfied and disengaged. Don't play into it.
Also
If enough people stop treating third parties like a wasted vote,
People might if any of the third parties had a serious candidate and a serious governing platform. Each of them is fundamentally flawed in one way or another, and a few of them are flawed from top to bottom. I get that you're dissatisfied with the status quo, but which one of these 3rd parties would be able to actually govern and not make a complete and utter mess of everything? Could you imagine if one of the major 3rd parties actually won? It would be an unmitigated disaster.
Unfortunately, that means that you're taking a vote away from the candidate from the two main parties that is closest to your views, which helps the candidate you oppose the most.
The two party system is truly problematic, but when it comes to November you have two options currently and voting for a 3rd party has the same impact as not voting at all. Voting for the candidate that you oppose the least lets you put a finger on the scale to at least try to avoid the worst possible outcome relative to your beliefs and values.
I absolutely agree, but you're talking about a situation where we already have 10 different ways and 20 EC2 instances. When you get to that point (or start approaching it), yeah, do the complex thing - no argument at all. The challenge is to wait until the last responsible moment to make that pivot and to not dive deeper into the complexity than you need at the current time and place. I've worked with countless small companies and teams in the past that have created whole K8s clusters, Terraform provisioning plans, and the whole kit for a single low volume service because "we'll need it when things scale out later" and later never arrives.
This is great until
I think that's the point. Don't jump to the complex right away. Keep it simple and compose the capabilities you have readily available until you need to become more complex. When the task requires it, yeah, do the complex thing, but keep the simplicity mandate in mind and only add the new complexity that you need. You can get pretty far with the simple, and what about all of the situations where that future pivot or growth never happens?
The philosophy strikes a cord with me - I'm often contending with teams that are building for the future complexities that they think might come up, and we realize later that we did get complexity in the problem later, but not the kind we had planned for, so all of that infrastructure and planning was wasted on an imaginary problem that no only didn't help us but often actually make our task harder. The trick is to keep the solution set composable and flexible so that if complexity shows up later, we can reconfigure and build the new capabilities that we need rather than having to maneuver a large complicated system that we built on a white board before we really knew what the problem looked like.
Yeah, I don't think the dying on the inside is the particular sort dying that is notable here.
Look at the link - does it have a token on it to identify that particular survey invitation as the one they sent you? I'd wager that's what happened rather than it being some deeper tracking. A stock standard survey monkey survey can do the same thing.