Yeah, but that's only because everyone in Maine keeps getting killed by Stephen King monsters, and those are tracked as accidental deaths.

For the curious, this is clearly an AI-tool and this cannot be trusted to report the factuality of anything.

Well, there WAS that thing a couple of months ago where Kilmeade said the quiet part out loud, suggesting we should execute them.

If the design capacity was 25000, it would mean that an assumption that 20% possible error would get you that range.

That seems like a decent "outside approximation" range. Yeah some 3 person apartments will have only 1 person, but some 1 persons will have 3

Hey! Don't be so narrow-minded. It could be one of the woke judges instead.

The sex crimes stuff is so they can detain LGBTQ youth and issue them whatever the yellow badge equivalent will be.

Well, but they did it the right way.

Regulation limiting the "approval" powers of the payment processors.

Or, an increase in viability of direct bank payments. There's vanishingly little reason that instant payments can't be available.

This isn't a client list, it's his address book.

For the free (no-interest) versions, it's a bullshit legal loophole in the US credit laws, or at least it was a few years ago. May have been more strongly codified since, though I bet almost nobody who could close it realizes the gap is there. The whole scheme is out of Australia, but I have no idea what their legal setup is.

The US requirements are basically:

• You can't charge fees to host the plan
• You can't charge % late fees, only fixed
• You can't have more than 4 installments, meaning no more than 5 payments if you include an optional down payment
• You must not deny customers for means-based items, or using credit data. You can give them an effectively meaningless approval value though.

You as a customer pay late fees if you miss a payment, but they make most of their money by charging the merchant a higher transaction fee. So, it's theoretically free for the customer, meaning it can fit into the loophole. Legally it isn't a credit product.

The TL;DR is "because the law is full of holes and bullshit, and if it's making people money then it's not likely to change"

Oregon legalized self-service a couple years ago, though stations still have to have attendant service too.

This instance (and I refer to the instance to intentionally be inclusive of both Ada and our community) takes issue with certain kinds of content, at least while we're on our local accounts.

Admins from another instance have taken the stance that this sort of content is not, by their own evaluation, harmful enough to be removed from their instance. That's a subjective choice about what they feel is right for their users, even if I disagree with the position.

Blahaj has decided that exposing the community to that sort of content, knowing it will not be removed by the remote instance, is not worth doing. However, in the interest of transparency and allowing users choice, has made sure its community is aware of the change.

Blahaj users who still wish to engage with the instance can easily still do so with accounts homed on other instances, should there be Communities or content that are of value to them.

What part of this do you have an issue with? This is how most people SHOULD be living their lives. If there's something that doesn't enrich your life, find ways of mitigating its impact. Don't like some vegetables? Find new recipes or supplement the nutrition otherwise. Uncle is kind of a douchebag? Stop going to holidays at his house. Friend holds political views you disagree with? Make sure your engagements with them are still something you enjoy.

Nobody is saying that there won't be aspects of life that are negative AND unavoidable. People have shitty jobs, terrible families, poor health. Why should that mean they should accept worse things in the parts of their life they do have discretion?