I’m not a lawyer, but it strikes me that this could be exactly what is happening. The ambulance company’s insurance wouldn’t pay the hospital directly, they aren’t health insurance. So instead, the cyclist’s health insurance footed the initial bill. Then they went after the cyclist for his deductible/copay/whatnot. Now he has to get the money from the ambulance company. If this was vehicle on vehicle violence, he would have gone to his auto insurance, who would have in turn went after the ambulance company’s insurance, but he might not have auto insurance or auto insurance might not be willing to get involved because he wasn’t driving. So he has to go direct to the company. Wouldn’t be shocking if the company pushed off any non-legal petitions from him because he doesn’t have the name weight of an insurance company with lawyers on retainer, so now he is seeking a legal remedy. Insurance doesn’t just work always, there is often a degree of negotiating and litigation involved in these exchanges, especially if one party disagrees with another on matters of liability

Connections Puzzle #515

🟨🟨🟨🟨

🟩🟩🟩🟦

🟩🟩🟩🟩

🟦🟦🟦🟦

🟪🟪🟪🟪

On the one hand, yes. On the other hand, Dearborn was not going to be sufficient to make up the difference here, and I’m skeptical you could even extrapolate that trend out to Arab Americans across the country and come out with a different outcome. Post pandemic inflation and the billionaire capture of all of our communications and media decided this election years ago

• 🟪🟩🟪🟪
• 🟪🟪🟪🟪
• 🟩🟩🟩🟩
• 🟨🟨🟨🟨
• 🟦🟦🟦🟦

This is a real shame. I love having Wordle and Connections as part of my wakeup routine before I get into work-brain mode. If only management weren’t so greedy and just negotiated with their workers for a fair contract, I wouldn’t have to deprive myself of these things. I hope the strike gets the workers everything they deserve for the good work they do

This passive language bullshit is so obvious sometimes. “Oh, I wonder what the cyclist did to get run over? And that poor SUV driver getting charged for murder because of this event, Paris is really going off the deep end finding ways to attack innocent drivers.” And yet, per the article, the SUV driver ran down the cyclist in a fit of road rage. That sounds an awful lot like an active choice by the driver, not some passive circumstance that the headline implies. If this person got angry and attacked someone with a knife, and the victim died, the headline wouldn’t be “Knife owner charged with murder after person stabbed”. But use the “right” weapon and all of a sudden we put the kiddie gloves on

How does this article not include a picture of the namesake genitalia of this spider? Looks like it is out of frame on the one picture included

I’m assuming they are referring to the fact that this is an unironic usage of a format that typically contains an ironic message. But I think this format is used to express counter narratives of all kinds, both serious and unserious, so I wouldn’t call this an incorrect usage. I mean, the format already has some bone hurting juice energy to start with, so I think gatekeeping its usage is maybe outside of the spirit of the template

Hi! I just want to say fuck you for making me laugh at such a bad pun. I thought I had taste. I’m devastated

It’s maybe worth pointing out that the analysis covers 10 years and appears to account for $0 in GDP growth (and corresponding tax base growth) dependent on those policies. If I’m reading this correctly (big if to be fair): Assuming the government continues to capture 17.5% of US GDP, Harris’ policies would need to generate roughly 4% GDP growth per year (no small feat, granted) to be net zero relative to absolute debt levels and less than that to be net zero relative to debt as a percentage of GDP. Government expenditure is not like consumer spending because almost every dollar it spends looks less like consumption and more like an investment, and leveraging investments is actually a valid strategy, especially when you have the economic momentum/inertia of a nation state to balance the risks involved with debt, and that is before you even get into fiscal monetary policy

The city already settled to pay about $3 per resident for the cops’ bad behavior and to put cops in a training on political violence. If some of the cops in question live outside of the city (not uncommon), they probably won’t pay a dime and the only impact they will feel is sitting through a training session that they will probably not take seriously

For me, I think it’s the fact that I have to prepare for both a social interaction and a monologue depending on whether they answer or not. As someone with mild social anxiety, the uncertainty and the fact that I am unequivocally initiating the interaction messes with a lot of the ways I would cope with joining a normal social interaction and throws me off my game

There are many leaders in each American political party, the leader of their representatives in the house, the leader of their senators, the leader of the party committee, the leader of the governor’s association, etc. But when a party controls the White House, the president is generally considered the head honcho. Part of that is respect for the office, part of it is practicality (the president has the biggest ability of any one person to message a party’s platform), and part of it is mechanics (every four years at the national convention, the party adopts the platform of their presidential candidate, essentially signing up to work for that person if and when they become president to support enacting that platform. Chuck Schumer is the Majority leader of the Democratic Senate caucus, which makes him very high ranking in the party, but Biden would still “outrank” him, so to speak. Jaime Harrison is the DNC chair, which is largely a fundraising and campaign strategy position vs. a position of power.

It’s easier to read if you read it as a line spoken by the Silicon Valley TV character Jian Yang

These aren’t actually bills. The press release in question is documenting Rules that the mentioned agencies are proposing adding to the CFR, which is controlled by the executive branch (although Congress does have some oversight/ability to veto that has grown recently due to Conservatives wanting to curtail the ability of a Democratic executive to improve people’s lives without negotiating through a Republican controlled filibuster) and separate from the US that is the set of laws controlled by the legislative branch. And these are separate rules within the CFR, probably not related to each other at all except for both being mentioned in the same press release.

To be honest, I’m struggling to keep track of the points you are making because you brought in several tangential topics all at once without much context (shale gas vs. oil, oil exports, LCOE, Poland all in a thread about solar energy in Finland compared to fossil fuel energy in Texas). I’ll just point out that the US is #4 in oil exports, by either barrels or export value (source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_exports) and the number one oil producer (source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_production), so I think it is pretty obvious that the investments into fossil fuel infrastructure in the US are well and above what is necessary for a “strategic reserve” use case

Right now a lot of “renewable energy” sources are subsidized in Europe for only political reasons.

I can assure you the same is true for fossil fuels in Texas right now, so I don’t see how this is a strike on renewable energy

Only half serious, but saying “the highest number is best” next to a plot showing North Korea as second highest has to make you ask yourself if either the metric is flawed or your usage of the term best isn’t in alignment with common parlance. A high density of medals per gdp per capita could be representative of an overinvestment into national prestige projects vs. other areas that may be more aligned to economic and social development. That probably goes for all three of the top three shown on this graph, to lesser or greater extents

Nvidia does not have a strong history of open sourcing things, to say the least. That last bit sounds like pure hopium

It’s definitely not that. They are just pointing out that the right to free speech prevents the government from impeding someone’s ability to say something, it doesn’t (despite implications made by a lot of people who cry out that their right to free speech is being impeded) force others to listen to or agree with that thing being said. If anything, the people that abuse the name of free speech by implying that it means people need to agree with them, or need to amplify their message, are attacking free speech by mudding the water around what it means and making it harder for good faith entities to invoke that right