image of text

no alt text

users with accessibility needs can’t read this

what is a link to the source?

🤦

image of text

no alt text

users with accessibility needs can’t read this

Thanks…

They should & they won’t. You know who owns the executive branch & gives absolutely 0 shits, right?

Wildcards, sometimes you need to see people and have no idea what you will pay in the end since sometimes they will do work or use something that isn’t fully covered so you then get a bill a month later telling you insurance only covered this you owe the difference.

You can request preauthorizations for an estimate. I always try to request those. Not always practical, however, especially when it’s urgent.

It’s up to you to figure out if that’s correct or not then go down the path of fighting it.

Fighting it is the worst. It’s a 3-body problem—you, the insurance, the provider—and you’re caught in the middle. You can’t just tell anyone in plain language “my insurance covers preventative care cost-free, so why am I being charged for this?” They force you to do the detective work, and they don’t make it easy. You basically have to know billing codes better than the billers and tell everyone to use correct ones. The billing codes aren’t necessarily printed on billing statements or claims (mine didn’t have them). Their meanings & provisions are unexplained. The patient has no reason to understand them or know they exist. Infuriating system.

This is just scratching the surface

You didn’t mention deductibles. Before copay or coinsurance kicks in, your policy may require paying a deductible. Cost sharing provisions vary by policy.

High deductible insurance plans come with a health savings account, which is completely tax-free (no taxes on contributions, their earnings, or eligible distributions) for health expenses including any type of cost share (deductible, copay, coinsurance). As long as you pay health expenses with other funds & retain the receipts, it functions in practice as a smaller investment retirement account with less taxes than IRAs. Somewhat interesting.

Health insurance typically doesn’t cover dental or vision: those need separate plans.

Another thing, you can’t just not have insurance. If you don’t, you will have to pay a penalty on your taxes for the time not covered.

Federally as of 2019 that was set to $0, so the amount ends up varying by state & could be $0.

The number of times I’ve seen screencaptures of text on a coding job that makes me think/say “you’re a coder, I’m a coder, you know we’ll need this as text, so what the fuck is wrong with you?” is too many.

Images of text happen way too often everywhere including lemmy. And they grace us without alt text like they’re going out of their way to fuck us & people with accessibility needs especially hard.

Nah, any decent password manager or security application can manage multi-factor security credentials of any kind without lock-out due to phone loss.

Password authentication is beyond primitive by offering too many avenues of attack: the full secret is transmitted & shared. Passkeys, client certificates, OTP don’t transmit the secret key. Passkeys & client certificates authentication never share a secret key, so the server can’t expose it.

Just print out the word “not”, wedge it into the sign: problem solved.

The lesson here is don’t troll these idiots

Maybe the lesson is to troll harder until they legislate themselves into ruin?

It doesn’t turn me on that much

That much?

Yes, that piece refers to the same event.

I feel like when I said, “Elon has been a public Nazi for a few years now,” what you heard was, “the general public has known Elon is a Nazi for a few years now.”

Were you trying to imply moral culpability for people “buying their own coffin from a Nazi” or not? Moral culpability only works if they reasonably would have known, so that “buying it” is a choice eligible for moral consideration.

If you’re merely observing the situation without moral consideration to point out gee, that’s ironic, then I’m forced to agree: that is ironic. However, you seem to be claiming more than that with the word excuse.

if you have a Model 3, you may have an excuse, but if you have a Cyberdump, you have no excuse

Thus, for your claim to work they had to be aware, and since we know nothing about them, we can only reasonably expect they knew if the general public knew. So, I don’t think I misunderstood you.

Yes, maga idiots have excused his behavior for years

Excused? No, they do the same and have for years. Feeding into Nazi conspiracy theories & agreeing with Nazis is typical MAGA behavior.

Remember Pizza Gate & the adrenochrome conspiracy? Both have roots in old antisemitic conspiracies of Jews consuming the blood of sacrificed children, though I doubt MAGA conspiracists know that.

Musk had a firm reason to know he was agreeing with a Nazi: the tweet he agreed with was answering a challenge for “cowards” posting “Hitler was right” to explain themselves. Even so, agreeing with Nazi conspiracies doesn’t amount to essentials that define Nazi: white supremacy, advocating for genocide & an ethnostate, etc. It doesn’t surprise me that people often see it as more MAGA idiocy similar to Trump saying both sides include “some very fine people”.

until after much of this behavior had already been very public

I agree it was public. I also submit that the general public probably saw it as MAGA instead of Nazi if they paid attention at all.

When people shop for a car, the company’s CEO may not be their top consideration if any. In the case of a Cyberflop, they may be looking at the environment, self-driving features, or fall for marketing gimmicks & believe they’re buying the greatest innovation.

Also, it’s just a fucking awful truck.

Totally. For that alone, they deserve all the blame for getting that deathtrap.

Let’s just forget this minor disagreement. That car’s a piece of shit. Fuck that car.

Not exactly a prominent headline & I don’t see a transcript. The 16-page sources documents links to online references including of a large number of tweets, several articles not regarding Musk, and some news articles on Musk. This is quite a bit to wade through. It’d be better to name clear, prominent headlines as I suggested before. Nonetheless, I’ll glance through.

The articles I’ve glanced through cover his descent into right-wing extremism on X, suspensions of journalists’ accounts, overtures to Putin & Trump. They cover criticism by advertisers & special interests of Musk’s tolerance for the spread of hate speech on X. There was that episode when Musk agreed with a post making a veiled reference to the antisemitic Great Replacement conspiracy theory, which led to denunciations by the ADL, advertisers pulling out, and Musk responding by posting objections to antisemitism & to organizations that push “racism of any kind” and by paying visits to Israel & Auschwitz.

Most of these could be construed as forgettable online MAGA mayhem. While that last episode drew headlines, rather than pin Musk down as a Nazi, a casual observer could easily discount it as online outrage over a MAGA idiot who falls for conspiracy bullshit & rolls that back. They could do that right before they easily forget it.

I don’t deny the conduct is troubling. However, these online distractions don’t exactly make memorable, prominent headlines that conclusively pin Musk down as a Nazi to the casual public. They don’t capture the public’s attention as clearly as Musk’s double Nazi salute.

If you could point out such a headline that the people in the collision would have known before they purchased the vehicle, then I’d concede your point, but at the moment I don’t see it.

MAGA idiot: sure.

Nazi years ago: name high profile headlines years ago that would have made that apparent to the casual public, and not only to obsessive social media dwellers heaping constant attention on his every move. Until the double Nazi salute, I doubt most people had any idea.

The Highway Patrol’s investigation into a November Cybertruck crash

Were they supposed to know that with their time machine or divine it through the occult?

Even as a kid, I never understood kids’ fascination with stickers. What’s so cool about a drawing on adhesive paper? I thought.

Self-cleaning oven setting: complimentary.

was watching right-wing influencers

At first, I was thinking stake-out and thought great, someone needs to keep an eye on those assholes, too bad they’re a shitty driver.

permanently

How permanently? Luigi?

It’s not that deep. Lots of teenagers do edgy stuff just because it’s edgy and not allowed.

Thank goodness we can arrest them for it. Imagine the objective harm & deprivation of rights or peaceful access to opportunities or resources that teenage edginess causes to society. Right?

That’s the most delulu & citation-free comment I’ve read in recent time: good job!

The premise of free expression is that the people get to decide what speech they want to hear, and it’s not the role of an authority to decide that for them. Seems you oppose that liberty & want an authority to decide. Isn’t there a name for people who oppose freedom & want everyone to obey authority? Aren’t there some rather unsavory characters who agree with you? That’s some awfully bad company: despite your superficial differences, you’re a bit too alike.

because calling out nazis as liars about their interest in free speech has got to mean abandoning freedom of speech.

No duh insincere people claiming to advocate for free speech don’t really mean it. This isn’t exactly new or debatable: what is argued with it is debatable.

Earlier, you write about “statements nearly impossible to implement” & looking for “solutions” as if free speech needs solving. It doesn’t. Free speech is its own solution: it means free for speech you dislike and for speech to answer it. There’s nothing to solve but a lack of dedication to & endurance of free speech.

application of ethical principles may change

this is a nice summary statement here.

Not to be lifted out of context, “people’s awareness & recognition of” is an important part of that quote.

It doesn’t mean their application to the same circumstances changes. What changes is people’s awareness/recognition, not that it applies or how (it always applied the moment it was possible to apply). Like finally recognizing equal rights apply to women or minorities. Or that protesting topless is protected speech. Or that free speech applies to communication over new technologies.

If you got that, though, then it’s a nice summary.