dhork

May as well just pay the bots directly then....

The article lists an insane revenue of $1.6B, yet the losses are only on the order of $42M in the last 3 months. Against that much revenue, it looks to me like they are managing the company at a slight loss on purpose. They probably could close that gap if they wanted to, but have some favorable tax implications or something by running that "slight" loss.

(And who knows, maybe this is part of the attempt to close that gap and show a profit before the founders cash out and it all gets sold to a Shittier company)

I just use the same combination that I have on my luggage

Because the techbros are pushing AI (really LLMs, but that is too many letters) for everything to justify their insane stock valuations

Sorry, but discrimination is discrimination, even if the people doing the discriminating are doing it for reasons they think are just. If stuff like this gets normalized, it's only a matter of time before it's weaponized against others, and the trans community in particular.

There's a direct line between things like anti-trans bathroom bills and this. Surely I can't be the only one that sees it this way?

Well, yeah, this is the same type of shit that is used to denigrate Muslims, or trans people, or any other marginalized group. "Some of them are violent, so we won't trust all of them!". I don't think we really want to go there, much less with half the human race.

I understand why women feel this is necessary, but I also understands that a policy like this paints all men with the same brush. It's like they are saying "Since a small number of men are creeps, we give you the option to avoid all men". Which seems to be counterproductive.

Meanwhile, Uber has invasive tracking, where they know everyone's history. They know how many drives a customer has provisioned without incident. And I have always considered these rideshare things to be particularly safe, because all parties are consenting to the tracking. That's not guarantee nothing will happen, of course, but it is more unlikely when all parties know Big Uber is watching you.

If Uber had rolled this out and said "you have the option to avoid rides with the opposite gender without an established history in our files", then I think I would have less of a problem with it. But it seems like I can do everything right, and be respectful of everyone, and give Uber shitloads of money, and still be potentially waiting longer for a ride, just because of my parts. How is that OK?

No worries, the SecDef knows he is "clean on OPSEC"....

US Catholic Clergy: Really? Those are rookie numbers....