Miscellaneous Discussion Thread II
Quote: DieterQuote: lilredrooster.
Walmart is the nation's leading retailer in terms of revenue -
they did an incredible $648 billion worth of business in 2024
Amazon was just behind them doing $638 billion in the same year
" Amazon is currently increasing sales at a faster rate than Walmart. While Walmart still has higher overall revenue, Amazon's growth, particularly in e-commerce and cloud services (AWS), is significantly outpacing Walmart's. This rapid growth trajectory suggests Amazon is likely to surpass Walmart in overall revenue in the near future, possibly by the end of 2025, according to The Motley Fool."
.
link to original post
I really don't see how AWS can be reasonably lumped in with Amazon's "selling merchandise" business for this comparison.
link to original post
"While Walmart does not exclusively use AWS cloud services and even actively advises some vendors to avoid it, they do utilize it for certain applications and have a hybrid cloud strategy. Walmart primarily uses its own private cloud, the Walmart Cloud Native Platform, and also leverages Microsoft Azure for some services, but they also utilize AWS for some vendor-provided applications. "
.
Quote:The Nevada State Police are searching for suspects who hurled large rocks from a pedestrian bridge onto traffic, damaging four vehicles and sending two people to the hospital with serious injuries.
Quote: lilredroosterQuote: DieterQuote: lilredrooster.
Walmart is the nation's leading retailer in terms of revenue -
they did an incredible $648 billion worth of business in 2024
Amazon was just behind them doing $638 billion in the same year
" Amazon is currently increasing sales at a faster rate than Walmart. While Walmart still has higher overall revenue, Amazon's growth, particularly in e-commerce and cloud services (AWS), is significantly outpacing Walmart's. This rapid growth trajectory suggests Amazon is likely to surpass Walmart in overall revenue in the near future, possibly by the end of 2025, according to The Motley Fool."
.
link to original post
I really don't see how AWS can be reasonably lumped in with Amazon's "selling merchandise" business for this comparison.
link to original post
"While Walmart does not exclusively use AWS cloud services and even actively advises some vendors to avoid it, they do utilize it for certain applications and have a hybrid cloud strategy. Walmart primarily uses its own private cloud, the Walmart Cloud Native Platform, and also leverages Microsoft Azure for some services, but they also utilize AWS for some vendor-provided applications. "
.
link to original post
Sorry, I should clarify.
Lumping AWS revenue in with Amazon sales to compare with Walmart sales doesn't make sense to me.
Quote: DieterQuote: lilredroosterQuote: DieterQuote: lilredrooster.
Walmart is the nation's leading retailer in terms of revenue -
they did an incredible $648 billion worth of business in 2024
Amazon was just behind them doing $638 billion in the same year
" Amazon is currently increasing sales at a faster rate than Walmart. While Walmart still has higher overall revenue, Amazon's growth, particularly in e-commerce and cloud services (AWS), is significantly outpacing Walmart's. This rapid growth trajectory suggests Amazon is likely to surpass Walmart in overall revenue in the near future, possibly by the end of 2025, according to The Motley Fool."
.
link to original post
I really don't see how AWS can be reasonably lumped in with Amazon's "selling merchandise" business for this comparison.
link to original post
"While Walmart does not exclusively use AWS cloud services and even actively advises some vendors to avoid it, they do utilize it for certain applications and have a hybrid cloud strategy. Walmart primarily uses its own private cloud, the Walmart Cloud Native Platform, and also leverages Microsoft Azure for some services, but they also utilize AWS for some vendor-provided applications. "
.
link to original post
Sorry, I should clarify.
Lumping AWS revenue in with Amazon sales to compare with Walmart sales doesn't make sense to me.
link to original post
you're assuming that the quote on Walmart's revenue did not include cloud services
but I think it did - I believe both quotes included their total revenue
.
Quote: lilredroosterQuote: Dieter
Sorry, I should clarify.
Lumping AWS revenue in with Amazon sales to compare with Walmart sales doesn't make sense to me.
link to original post
you're assuming that the quote on Walmart's revenue did not include cloud services
but I think it did - I believe both quotes included their total revenue
.
link to original post
I'm assuming that Walmart's data centers ("cloud") are for Walmart's business use, not for selling bandwidth, storage, and computational work to the public.
I'm surprised. A few years ago, my internet purchases were 95% Amazon and 5% JC Penny. This year, I think I'll spend more with Walmart than Amazon. Walmart has stepped up their game, while Amazon ships slower and is full of fakes these days.
Quote: Dieter
I'm assuming that Walmart's data centers ("cloud") are for Walmart's business use, not for selling bandwidth, storage, and computational work to the public.
link to original post
Way cooler if it was though. Until that is available, "getting hacked at Walmart" will just mean a nude guy with a machete showed up.
Walmart does seem to be leaving money on the table by not exploiting its logistics and large number of physical, publicly accessible locations for something.
Quote: AutomaticMonkeyQuote: Dieter
I'm assuming that Walmart's data centers ("cloud") are for Walmart's business use, not for selling bandwidth, storage, and computational work to the public.
link to original post
Way cooler if it was though. Until that is available, "getting hacked at Walmart" will just mean a nude guy with a machete showed up.
Walmart does seem to be leaving money on the table by not exploiting its logistics and large number of physical, publicly accessible locations for something.
link to original post
I'm not sure that's money they want.
There are options for third party sellers that fulfill through Walmart. I wouldn't want to accept an outside package for delivery like a common carrier. It would almost certainly be slower and more expensive than just using a common carrier for delivery, since the logistics pipeline is not currently aligned to handle this efficiently.
Quote: DieterQuote: AutomaticMonkeyQuote: Dieter
I'm assuming that Walmart's data centers ("cloud") are for Walmart's business use, not for selling bandwidth, storage, and computational work to the public.
link to original post
Way cooler if it was though. Until that is available, "getting hacked at Walmart" will just mean a nude guy with a machete showed up.
Walmart does seem to be leaving money on the table by not exploiting its logistics and large number of physical, publicly accessible locations for something.
link to original post
I'm not sure that's money they want.
There are options for third party sellers that fulfill through Walmart. I wouldn't want to accept an outside package for delivery like a common carrier. It would almost certainly be slower and more expensive than just using a common carrier for delivery, since the logistics pipeline is not currently aligned to handle this efficiently.
link to original post
I'm thinking not so much common carrier services but station-to-station delivery. That way first-mile and/or last-mile shipping costs can be backed out of the final delivered price.
So let's say I order a recliner from Amazon. They might say "free delivery" to my door but we all know it's not free. On the other hand if I ordered it from Walmart+, why not let me pick it up myself at my nearest Walmart store? That way it never leaves their warehouse to store logistics and that's going to be cheaper for them than contracting for last-mile, and my price can reflect that. They could do that with ordinary purchases too, the equivalent of Amazon lockers at every store.
Quote: AxelWolfSomewhat diffrent, but Club fortune was giving 1099's for as little as $50 in free play drawings.Quote: DRichQuote: ChumpChange
I guess I need to spend less than 60,000 points ($600) on my casino Rewards card in a year in each casino so I don't draw a 1099-MISC form. But if it's just a rebate on prior play I guess I won't get one if I go over.
Form 1099-MISC recipients - Prizes and awards
https://www.patriotsoftware.com/blog/accounting/what-is-a-1099-misc/
I don't recall any U.S. casinos sending 1099's for rewards points if redeemed for free play. The IRS and accountants have been arguing it for years.
link to original post
link to original post
Yes, drawing are subject to 1099's. I was in charge of keeping track of it for our casinos and it was a pain in the butt. What I did was collect the information for every winner and at the end of the year each player that had a aggregate total over $600 got a 1099. A casino can send a 1099 for any drawing amount even for $1. They are not required to send one unless it is over $600.
pretty interesting article from the New York Times re AI, which just about everybody is talking up
it's still expected to be a game changer but a great many companies have yet seen no or little benefit from it
from the link:
"despite companies’ huge investments in new technology, there was scant evidence of a corresponding gain in workers’ efficiency.
According to recent research from McKinsey & Company, nearly eight in 10 companies have reported using generative A.I., but just as many have reported “no significant bottom-line impact.”
Investments in generative A.I. by businesses are expected to increase 94 percent this year to $61.9 billion, according to IDC, a technology research firm.
But the percentage of companies abandoning most of their A.I. pilot projects soared to 42 percent by the end of 2024, up from 17 percent the previous year, according to a survey of more than 1,000 technology and business managers by S&P Global, a data and analytics firm.
Projects failed not only because of technical hurdles, but often because of “human factors” like employee and customer resistance or lack of skills, said Alexander Johnston, a senior analyst at S&P Global."
https://archive.ph/NfZxR#selection-677.0-680.0
.
Quote: lilredrooster.
pretty interesting article from the New York Times re AI, which just about everybody is talking up
it's still expected to be a game changer but a great many companies have yet seen no or little benefit from it
from the link:
"despite companies’ huge investments in new technology, there was scant evidence of a corresponding gain in workers’ efficiency.
According to recent research from McKinsey & Company, nearly eight in 10 companies have reported using generative A.I., but just as many have reported “no significant bottom-line impact.”
Investments in generative A.I. by businesses are expected to increase 94 percent this year to $61.9 billion, according to IDC, a technology research firm.
But the percentage of companies abandoning most of their A.I. pilot projects soared to 42 percent by the end of 2024, up from 17 percent the previous year, according to a survey of more than 1,000 technology and business managers by S&P Global, a data and analytics firm.
Projects failed not only because of technical hurdles, but often because of “human factors” like employee and customer resistance or lack of skills, said Alexander Johnston, a senior analyst at S&P Global."
https://archive.ph/NfZxR#selection-677.0-680.0
.
link to original post
This AI talk reminds me of the internet about 1996-1998. Execs said they needed to "invest in it." One guy worked for me when I asked for an example of a non-seasonal business said "internet." I said, "what part of it? ISP? Design?" Right now money is being thrown at AI because it is suspected to be the next big thing. What became important with the internet by 2005 was not imagined in 1995. Same is going to happen to AI. Remember what you are seeing now in 10 years.
Quote: AutomaticMonkeyQuote: DieterQuote: AutomaticMonkeyQuote: Dieter
I'm assuming that Walmart's data centers ("cloud") are for Walmart's business use, not for selling bandwidth, storage, and computational work to the public.
link to original post
Way cooler if it was though. Until that is available, "getting hacked at Walmart" will just mean a nude guy with a machete showed up.
Walmart does seem to be leaving money on the table by not exploiting its logistics and large number of physical, publicly accessible locations for something.
link to original post
I'm not sure that's money they want.
There are options for third party sellers that fulfill through Walmart. I wouldn't want to accept an outside package for delivery like a common carrier. It would almost certainly be slower and more expensive than just using a common carrier for delivery, since the logistics pipeline is not currently aligned to handle this efficiently.
link to original post
I'm thinking not so much common carrier services but station-to-station delivery. That way first-mile and/or last-mile shipping costs can be backed out of the final delivered price.
So let's say I order a recliner from Amazon. They might say "free delivery" to my door but we all know it's not free. On the other hand if I ordered it from Walmart+, why not let me pick it up myself at my nearest Walmart store? That way it never leaves their warehouse to store logistics and that's going to be cheaper for them than contracting for last-mile, and my price can reflect that. They could do that with ordinary purchases too, the equivalent of Amazon lockers at every store.
link to original post
Last time I ordered from Walmart.com that was definitely an available option. So I think they are doing that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WWTzQ-mRFw&list=RD2WWTzQ-mRFw&start_radio=1
Quote: AZDuffmanQuote: lilredrooster.
pretty interesting article from the New York Times re AI, which just about everybody is talking up
it's still expected to be a game changer but a great many companies have yet seen no or little benefit from it
from the link:
"despite companies’ huge investments in new technology, there was scant evidence of a corresponding gain in workers’ efficiency.
According to recent research from McKinsey & Company, nearly eight in 10 companies have reported using generative A.I., but just as many have reported “no significant bottom-line impact.”
Investments in generative A.I. by businesses are expected to increase 94 percent this year to $61.9 billion, according to IDC, a technology research firm.
But the percentage of companies abandoning most of their A.I. pilot projects soared to 42 percent by the end of 2024, up from 17 percent the previous year, according to a survey of more than 1,000 technology and business managers by S&P Global, a data and analytics firm.
Projects failed not only because of technical hurdles, but often because of “human factors” like employee and customer resistance or lack of skills, said Alexander Johnston, a senior analyst at S&P Global."
https://archive.ph/NfZxR#selection-677.0-680.0
.
link to original post
This AI talk reminds me of the internet about 1996-1998. Execs said they needed to "invest in it." One guy worked for me when I asked for an example of a non-seasonal business said "internet." I said, "what part of it? ISP? Design?" Right now money is being thrown at AI because it is suspected to be the next big thing. What became important with the internet by 2005 was not imagined in 1995. Same is going to happen to AI. Remember what you are seeing now in 10 years.
link to original post
It's well known that Bill Gates totally screwed himself with the internet. He had an opportunity at the very beginning to invest heavily in it and he didn't invest anything because he thought it had limited use, he thought computers would only be used in businesses and the military and they would use the internet to talk to each other but the public would have no interest in it. He could be today's Elon Musk if he could have seen the future. Mark Twain did the same thing with the telephone, Alexander Bell asked him to invest in his telephone on the ground floor and Twain could have been a millionaire but he could see no use for the phone other than some housewife ordering groceries or making a doctor's appointment. Instead he went broke investing in things that went nowhere.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: AZDuffmanQuote: lilredrooster.
pretty interesting article from the New York Times re AI, which just about everybody is talking up
it's still expected to be a game changer but a great many companies have yet seen no or little benefit from it
from the link:
"despite companies’ huge investments in new technology, there was scant evidence of a corresponding gain in workers’ efficiency.
According to recent research from McKinsey & Company, nearly eight in 10 companies have reported using generative A.I., but just as many have reported “no significant bottom-line impact.”
Investments in generative A.I. by businesses are expected to increase 94 percent this year to $61.9 billion, according to IDC, a technology research firm.
But the percentage of companies abandoning most of their A.I. pilot projects soared to 42 percent by the end of 2024, up from 17 percent the previous year, according to a survey of more than 1,000 technology and business managers by S&P Global, a data and analytics firm.
Projects failed not only because of technical hurdles, but often because of “human factors” like employee and customer resistance or lack of skills, said Alexander Johnston, a senior analyst at S&P Global."
https://archive.ph/NfZxR#selection-677.0-680.0
.
link to original post
This AI talk reminds me of the internet about 1996-1998. Execs said they needed to "invest in it." One guy worked for me when I asked for an example of a non-seasonal business said "internet." I said, "what part of it? ISP? Design?" Right now money is being thrown at AI because it is suspected to be the next big thing. What became important with the internet by 2005 was not imagined in 1995. Same is going to happen to AI. Remember what you are seeing now in 10 years.
link to original post
It's well known that Bill Gates totally screwed himself with the internet. He had an opportunity at the very beginning to invest heavily in it and he didn't invest anything because he thought it had limited use, he thought computers would only be used in businesses and the military and they would use the internet to talk to each other but the public would have no interest in it. He could be today's Elon Musk if he could have seen the future. Mark Twain did the same thing with the telephone, Alexander Bell asked him to invest in his telephone on the ground floor and Twain could have been a millionaire but he could see no use for the phone other than some housewife ordering groceries or making a doctor's appointment. Instead he went broke investing in things that went nowhere.
link to original post
I started out-of-college work in 1994. Almost no business internet use. At a manager trainee seminar they told us how we had a website. In 1997 or so it was clear they barely monitored the online leads. In 2003 I had a job where some people communicated with us via email but we used it for other parts of our job. By 2010 I had a job where it would have been next to impossible to function without it.
In 1995 everyone thought it would be online stores. 20 years later I used it to find info on people who died 100 years before. Yes, a site of grave sites. Researching some people from the 1700w-1800s I would find articles.about them, a couple Revolution and Civil War heroes. Without the internet these would have been dead ends. I've gotten jobs via internet communication and never met my client. I knew the internet would be hugely imortant by 1992, when 95% of the USA had never heard of it. But I had no idea it would go to where it did.
AI might or might not be the same way. On one hand it could do amazing things. OTOH it could make us a nation of idiots. Word is half the essays in high school classes are just AI generated. That is only a start.
Quote: EvenBob
It's well known that Bill Gates totally screwed himself with the internet.
When I think of people that totally screwed themselves Bill Gates is nowhere on that list. I can think of about $116 billion reasons he doesn't seem screwed to me.
Quote: AZDuffman
This AI talk reminds me of the internet about 1996-1998. Execs said they needed to "invest in it." One guy worked for me when I asked for an example of a non-seasonal business said "internet." I said, "what part of it? ISP? Design?" Right now money is being thrown at AI because it is suspected to be the next big thing. What became important with the internet by 2005 was not imagined in 1995. Same is going to happen to AI. Remember what you are seeing now in 10 years.
link to original post
Or it could take the Yahoo route. I remember when you could do anything on Yahoo. Huge market cap, but based on.... what? No way to monetize it.
I see the same for AI. So we have these things writing everyone's resume, doing all the kids' homework, writing ad copy, writing news articles, but all that can be done with free & open source software available to everyone now. How do they monetize that? The Browser Wars seem ridiculous in retrospect now that we can all download our choice of open source browsers. The only thing novel about AI is it lets us talk to a computer in English like Captain Kirk. Being science fiction is a worthy identifier of human desires making available the things found in it tend to be popular winners. But that does not mean they will all be financial winners.
So I suspect it will follow a familiar pattern: AI tech will be driven by a large FOSS project, with a million regular dudes with networked servers powering it, and a commercial "AI For Dummies" version which the public sees as a button you press on your iPhone that connects to whatever AI service the people who made that button think it should. Like the FOSS Chromium project being experienced by the vast majority of users only as Google's "Chrome" spyware.
Maybe I'll try this: [in Montgomery Scott accent] "Computer: write me a setup and install script for a custom Linux system" and describe exactly what I want that system to have and do. I'll have to describe my hardware and what kernel I'm using too. Then when I run that script at a bare command prompt my new Linux machine should be up and running in an hour.
Passwords to access it will cost 50k?
Of course that will leave all control in the hands of a few.
OTOH, what’s new?
Quote: DRichQuote: AxelWolfSomewhat diffrent, but Club fortune was giving 1099's for as little as $50 in free play drawings.Quote: DRichQuote: ChumpChange
I guess I need to spend less than 60,000 points ($600) on my casino Rewards card in a year in each casino so I don't draw a 1099-MISC form. But if it's just a rebate on prior play I guess I won't get one if I go over.
Form 1099-MISC recipients - Prizes and awards
https://www.patriotsoftware.com/blog/accounting/what-is-a-1099-misc/
I don't recall any U.S. casinos sending 1099's for rewards points if redeemed for free play. The IRS and accountants have been arguing it for years.
link to original post
link to original post
Yes, drawing are subject to 1099's. I was in charge of keeping track of it for our casinos and it was a pain in the butt. What I did was collect the information for every winner and at the end of the year each player that had a aggregate total over $600 got a 1099. A casino can send a 1099 for any drawing amount even for $1. They are not required to send one unless it is over $600.
link to original post
I’ve received a W2-G in lieu of a 1099-G from a particular casino after each of 3 drawings in which I won $1000, $1250, and $1250 cash, respectively. I didn’t pursue the “error”, as I figured it didn’t affect me tax-wise. Am I wrong? Should I insist on the correct form?
Quote: camaplQuote: DRichQuote: AxelWolfSomewhat diffrent, but Club fortune was giving 1099's for as little as $50 in free play drawings.Quote: DRichQuote: ChumpChange
I guess I need to spend less than 60,000 points ($600) on my casino Rewards card in a year in each casino so I don't draw a 1099-MISC form. But if it's just a rebate on prior play I guess I won't get one if I go over.
Form 1099-MISC recipients - Prizes and awards
https://www.patriotsoftware.com/blog/accounting/what-is-a-1099-misc/
I don't recall any U.S. casinos sending 1099's for rewards points if redeemed for free play. The IRS and accountants have been arguing it for years.
link to original post
link to original post
Yes, drawing are subject to 1099's. I was in charge of keeping track of it for our casinos and it was a pain in the butt. What I did was collect the information for every winner and at the end of the year each player that had a aggregate total over $600 got a 1099. A casino can send a 1099 for any drawing amount even for $1. They are not required to send one unless it is over $600.
link to original post
I’ve received a W2-G in lieu of a 1099-G from a particular casino after each of 3 drawings in which I won $1000, $1250, and $1250 cash, respectively. I didn’t pursue the “error”, as I figured it didn’t affect me tax-wise. Am I wrong? Should I insist on the correct form?
link to original post
I have no idea but with such small amounts it probably wouldn't be worth pursuing.
Quote: DRichQuote: EvenBob
It's well known that Bill Gates totally screwed himself with the internet.
When I think of people that totally screwed themselves Bill Gates is nowhere on that list. I can think of about $116 billion reasons he doesn't seem screwed to me.
link to original post
He screwed himself with the internet and he admits it. He talks about it. He says that in 1992 he was told to invest heavily in the internet and he laughed at them. He thought there was no way it was ever going to amount to anything and by 2000 he was deeply regretting it because then it was too late. As far as kids in high school writing their papers with AI, my math professor daughter says she can tell when they turn papers in done by AI because a lot of it is wrong. Stupidly wrong. But the kids don't know the math so they don't know that AI is screwing them. Screwing them on purpose, it knows how to do it right. Look at grok over the weekend, apparently it went nuts and they had to shut it down.
*********************************************************
The bill, which was signed into law on July 4, makes changes to tax policy, including a reversal of the previous 1099-K reporting thresholds. The good news is that for small sellers and buyers, they'll likely benefit from the changes.
Before the law went into effect, the IRS was scheduled to lower the reporting threshold to $600 beginning in 2026. That would have raised the number of taxpayers getting Form 1099-K. The new law reverses that plan.
According to Bankrate, "Under the 'big, beautiful bill,' the 1099-K reporting threshold reverts to $20,000 in payments and 200 transactions in a calendar year, effective for 2025 and beyond." Bankrate adds, "This means fewer taxpayers will receive the forms — a welcome change for those who use platforms like PayPal or Venmo for occasional sales or personal transfers."
It's worth noting that Zelle is not part of these tax laws. "While most platforms are required to follow 1099-K reporting requirements, Zelle doesn't fall within that category," Bankrate explains.
The new law goes into effect starting with the 2025 calendar year, so the updated 1099-K thresholds will apply to tax returns filed in 2026.
"The changes will offer much-needed relief for casual sellers and small business owners who use platforms like PayPal, Venmo and Etsy," Ella Rivkin, CEO of ERPS Group, an accounting firm in New York City, told Bankrate. So, there's a good chance that the wood plaques you're making for your friends and family and selling for next to nothing on Etsy won't get you to the threshold, but always check with a tax professional.
Individual states also have their own tax laws and some have lower thresholds for 1099-Ks, so it's wise to check your state's tax policy. Again, also contact a tax professional when dealing with taxes.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/smallbusiness/americans-will-be-taxed-on-their-paypal-and-venmo-payments/ar-AA1KtcMD?ocid=winp1taskbar&cvid=689d3b38f8e14a56bda5d25618350104&ei=26
The promise was no tax on overtime. The reality is quite different.
Suppose you make $20 an hour and $30 during overtime. You get called in for an extra shift and earn $240 for the day. With no tax on OT, you expect an extra $240 in your net pay. Wrong.
It turns out you will get taxed on $20 per hour so $160 of you pay is subject to tax. The entire $240 is subject to state, local and payroll taxes, so if you live in NYC, you'll end up paying a good portion of your "tax-free" overtime in taxes. It's also limited to the first $12,000 in OT per year. Members of the NYPD often earn over 100K in OT, so this is not nearly the benefit that was promised.
Quote: billryanDetails are emerging on the no tax on overtime provision of the new law and it isn't very good.
The promise was no tax on overtime. The reality is quite different.
Suppose you make $20 an hour and $30 during overtime. You get called in for an extra shift and earn $240 for the day. With no tax on OT, you expect an extra $240 in your net pay. Wrong.
It turns out you will get taxed on $20 per hour so $160 of you pay is subject to tax. The entire $240 is subject to state, local and payroll taxes, so if you live in NYC, you'll end up paying a good portion of your "tax-free" overtime in taxes. It's also limited to the first $12,000 in OT per year. Members of the NYPD often earn over 100K in OT, so this is not nearly the benefit that was promised.
link to original post
Good. It's a stupid law.
Quote: billryanDetails are emerging on the no tax on overtime provision of the new law and it isn't very good.
The promise was no tax on overtime. The reality is quite different.
Suppose you make $20 an hour and $30 during overtime. You get called in for an extra shift and earn $240 for the day. With no tax on OT, you expect an extra $240 in your net pay. Wrong.
It turns out you will get taxed on $20 per hour so $160 of you pay is subject to tax. The entire $240 is subject to state, local and payroll taxes, so if you live in NYC, you'll end up paying a good portion of your "tax-free" overtime in taxes. It's also limited to the first $12,000 in OT per year. Members of the NYPD often earn over 100K in OT, so this is not nearly the benefit that was promised.
link to original post
You sound like all those greedy Oprah fans who won a car then found out they had to pay tax on it. I don't know about you, but I am happy when I get any tax cut.
No taxes on Social Security is done in a way to help roughly 12% of Seniors and no taxes on overtime is estimated to affect roughly 5% of people's incomes, but a win is a win, right?
I'm not sure how making OT cheaper for the employer is supposed to lead to job creation, but in this new Golden Age, up is down and sideways is straight ahead.
It was a bad gimmick as proposed and far worse when it was enacted, but twenty bucks is twenty bucks.
Quote: billryanI suppose someone has to pay for those billionaire tax cuts.
No taxes on Social Security is done in a way to help roughly 12% of Seniors and no taxes on overtime is estimated to affect roughly 5% of people's incomes, but a win is a win, right?
I'm not sure how making OT cheaper for the employer is supposed to lead to job creation, but in this new Golden Age, up is down and sideways is straight ahead.
link to original post
Political speech is not allowed on WoV.
BREAKING: A staggering 71 large US companies filed for bankruptcy in July, marking the highest monthly total since the 2020 pandemic. This is a continuation of the trend seen in June and May, with 66 and 64 filings, respectively. As of this year, there have been 446 large bankruptcies, the highest number in 15 years.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkhWHISJr0E
I watch quite a few true crime shows many of which are quite entertaining
so many times the criminal has incriminating material on his phone or computer and he deletes it
but the techs that the cops use can recover it even if it's been deleted
you would think that the criminals would know this by now but apparently they don't
I believe there is a way to completely erase something off of a hard drive so that it cannot be recovered but these criminals obviously don't know how to do it
.
Quote: billryanDetails are emerging on the no tax on overtime provision of the new law and it isn't very good.
The promise was no tax on overtime. The reality is quite different.
Suppose you make $20 an hour and $30 during overtime. You get called in for an extra shift and earn $240 for the day. With no tax on OT, you expect an extra $240 in your net pay. Wrong.
It turns out you will get taxed on $20 per hour so $160 of you pay is subject to tax. The entire $240 is subject to state, local and payroll taxes, so if you live in NYC, you'll end up paying a good portion of your "tax-free" overtime in taxes. It's also limited to the first $12,000 in OT per year. Members of the NYPD often earn over 100K in OT, so this is not nearly the benefit that was promised.
link to original post
Somehow, I don't feel any sympathy for anyone who makes $100K in OT alone NOT getting the tax cut.
Quote: lilredrooster.
I watch quite a few true crime shows many of which are quite entertaining
so many times the criminal has incriminating material on his phone or computer and he deletes it
but the techs that the cops use can recover it even if it's been deleted
you would think that the criminals would know this by now but apparently they don't
I believe there is a way to completely erase something off of a hard drive so that it cannot be recovered but these criminals obviously don't know how to do it
.
link to original post
I guess one way to do it is to back up your phone before it acquires incriminating evidence, then go and commit whatever skullduggery you are involved in, then restore the phone to factory settings, then restore from the backup. Or use a burner phone then run it through a shredder. For a computer, delete the , but defragment the hard drive or use data shredding software to wipe the hard drive according to the government security standard.
Or, don't commit crimes! Any criminal who has evidence of their crimes on the phones or computers, or an adulterer who have evidence of their affairs on the phones or computers are morons. Absolute morons.
Quote: lilredrooster.
I watch quite a few true crime shows many of which are quite entertaining
so many times the criminal has incriminating material on his phone or computer and he deletes it
but the techs that the cops use can recover it even if it's been deleted
you would think that the criminals would know this by now but apparently they don't
I believe there is a way to completely erase something off of a hard drive so that it cannot be recovered but these criminals obviously don't know how to do it
.
link to original post
The only way I would trust deleting would be take the computer apart on my bench then grind it to dust. But the emails will still be somewhere else. Back in the 80s emails brought down Col North I was told in college.
Quote: lilredrooster.
I watch quite a few true crime shows many of which are quite entertaining
so many times the criminal has incriminating material on his phone or computer and he deletes it
but the techs that the cops use can recover it even if it's been deleted
you would think that the criminals would know this by now but apparently they don't
I believe there is a way to completely erase something off of a hard drive so that it cannot be recovered but these criminals obviously don't know how to do it
.
link to original post
Criminals tend not to be the smartest. There are ways to remove evidence on computers and phones but it takes some effort that most people aren't willing to invest. I am sure you or I would have no problem, but we would research it and be meticulous.
Quote: billryanPeople are dumb. I'm training for an advocate position and part of the training is spending two mornings a week in court so I get familiar with the processes. It's boring as hell 90% of the time, but sometimes you have to restrain from laughing at the stupidity. Somebody watches an internet video and thinks they know the correct order of words to show the judge they are innocent or that the court lacks jurisdiction.
link to original post
I love the way courts work and I look forward to suing someone in small claims court. It just sounds fun to me.
Quote: DRichQuote: lilredrooster.
I watch quite a few true crime shows many of which are quite entertaining
so many times the criminal has incriminating material on his phone or computer and he deletes it
but the techs that the cops use can recover it even if it's been deleted
you would think that the criminals would know this by now but apparently they don't
I believe there is a way to completely erase something off of a hard drive so that it cannot be recovered but these criminals obviously don't know how to do it
.
link to original post
Criminals tend not to be the smartest. There are ways to remove evidence on computers and phones but it takes some effort that most people aren't willing to invest. I am sure you or I would have no problem, but we would research it and be meticulous.
link to original post
The vast majority of criminals are not very bright, that's why they're criminals. Most of these people don't set out to commit a crime, they decide to do it somewhere along the way and they've already laid a trail that they can't get rid of. A smart criminal knows he is going to commit the crime, does not leave a trail of any kind anywhere, and doesn't tell anyone what he's doing. He's the only person who knows about it and there is no trail, these people are almost impossible to catch. If you need to find out information that's sensitive to what you're doing just go to the library and use their computer. I would have made a great criminal because nobody can keep a secret like I can. So many things I've done in my life and I don't mean bad things, but some bad things, nobody but me knows about. I was told over and over when I lived in California that I would make a really good drug dealer because I don't talk, and I don't do any drugs. Those are the two downfalls of most drug dealers they talk too much and they do their own product. But I could never do something like that.
Quote: GenoDRPhQuote: lilredrooster.
I watch quite a few true crime shows many of which are quite entertaining
so many times the criminal has incriminating material on his phone or computer and he deletes it
but the techs that the cops use can recover it even if it's been deleted
you would think that the criminals would know this by now but apparently they don't
I believe there is a way to completely erase something off of a hard drive so that it cannot be recovered but these criminals obviously don't know how to do it
.
link to original post
I guess one way to do it is to back up your phone before it acquires incriminating evidence, then go and commit whatever skullduggery you are involved in, then restore the phone to factory settings, then restore from the backup. Or use a burner phone then run it through a shredder. For a computer, delete the , but defragment the hard drive or use data shredding software to wipe the hard drive according to the government security standard.
Or, don't commit crimes! Any criminal who has evidence of their crimes on the phones or computers, or an adulterer who have evidence of their affairs on the phones or computers are morons. Absolute morons.
link to original post
Sensitive material I write to a microSD card, which can be easily cracked between the teeth when under duress. I haven't tried swallowing the pieces and I'd rather not without a good reason. But you can carry that around in a gum wrapper and if you have to destroy, it looks like you are just chewing gum.
Don't commit crimes? I wish I could avoid it. But I commit my "3 felonies a day" just like everyone else. The past 10 or so years should have shown us a few things; that what is a crime is arbitrary and often has more to do with the person than the act, that the people in charge of investigating crimes might be criminals themselves, and that you being accused of a crime might have nothing to do with you at all, but pressure to get you to cooperate with something else. When there is a high profile crime in the news, what they might be looking for is not necessarily who did it, but someone they want to say did it and who doesn't have an alibi. So play it close to the vest; the less information they have about you the better.
There are no pornographic pictures of me and I also cannot imagine what compels people to record and archive that part of their lives.
Quote: AutomaticMonkey
There are no pornographic pictures of me and I also cannot imagine what compels people to record and archive that part of their lives.
link to original post
I agree, I am ugly enough clothed that I don't want anyone seeing me naked
Quote: EvenBob
The vast majority of criminals are not very bright, that's why they're criminals. Most of these people don't set out to commit a crime, they decide to do it somewhere along the way and they've already laid a trail that they can't get rid of. A smart criminal knows he is going to commit the crime, does not leave a trail of any kind anywhere, and doesn't tell anyone what he's doing. He's the only person who knows about it and there is no trail, these people are almost impossible to catch. If you need to find out information that's sensitive to what you're doing just go to the library and use their computer. I would have made a great criminal because nobody can keep a secret like I can. So many things I've done in my life and I don't mean bad things, but some bad things, nobody but me knows about. I was told over and over when I lived in California that I would make a really good drug dealer because I don't talk, and I don't do any drugs. Those are the two downfalls of most drug dealers they talk too much and they do their own product. But I could never do something like that.
link to original post
It seems that way, but if you want to be a drug dealer you have to at least start by doing a lot of drugs. So that everyone who knows you associates you with drugs, and you will find yourself surrounded by people who also are into drugs. Good for business!
Without a reputation for drug use, you won't be trusted enough by customers or suppliers to be a drug dealer.
Quote: DRichQuote: AutomaticMonkey
There are no pornographic pictures of me and I also cannot imagine what compels people to record and archive that part of their lives.
link to original post
I agree, I am ugly enough clothed that I don't want anyone seeing me naked
link to original post
Because I have a beard and don't shave I literally go weeks without looking at myself in the mirror. And when I finally do half the time I go who the hell is that guy. I've been this way for decades, I never look in the mirror to see how I look when I'm leaving the house. Why would I, I don't care. I'm not dating anyone, I married. I'm not looking for a job. Why would I give one frick what somebody thinks about how I look. If you're paying attention you learn early on is that most people who look at you don't even see you, their brains are too busy doing something else. This is why eye witnesses to a crime are almost useless. 10 people will have 10 different stories because none of them are paying attention. Scott Adams the cartoonist worked in a bank for years and they were robbed and he found out the description he gave to the police was 100% wrong. And he has a genius IQ. He was in Mensa for years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silk_Road_(marketplace)
The FBI left the site open for a while to anyone to read, after they did bust them. I remember some saying their computer was rigged to catch on fire, or some such.
Quote: rxwineThis was quite a while back (2013), but I remember going to the site and reading how posters were trying to protect their computers from a possible raid.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silk_Road_(marketplace)
The FBI left the site open for a while to anyone to read, after they did bust them. I remember some saying their computer was rigged to catch on fire, or some such.
link to original post
I do remember some discussions about hard drives in self-destruct enclosures. Something about a thermite burn being triggered if the proper shutdown sequence wasn't executed.
It is also the home of the "Eight Percent Fund" as it came to be known. Sometime in the late 1970s, Burt Marshall, a local businessman, began an investment fund for residents of the town. The idea was to buy up houses in the town as they became available and convert them into rental properties for students and faculty of the college. Over forty years, the fund bought up hundreds of local houses and ended up owning thousands of rental units.. It made regular payments to its members, and in the low-interest environment of this century, money flowed into the fund as it paid out its promised eight percent. Mr. Marshall ran a seemingly thriving insurance agency and was a mainstay in the town's civic affairs. As many of its neighboring towns suffered through the sluggish upstate economy, Hamilton was thriving, thanks to Mr. Marshall's investors' fund.
There were numerous red flags as people received statements detailing their investments and income checks, but the financial statements for the actual funds were never released. A few people suspected something was wrong, but forty-plus years of on-time payments to fundholders was just too tempting. Over the years, nearly a hundred million dollars flowed into this fund to buy rental properties until someone pointed out that for a hundred million dollars, the fund should own the entire town, not just a small portion of it.
A long overdue examination of the fund revealed it had taken in ninety-four million dollars and held property worth twenty million at best. Nearly seventy million dollars was gone. Marshal claimed that none of the money was investments, but personal loans that his bankruptcy should void. Hundreds of town residents had their entire retirement accounts in the non-insured fund, and it is estimated that members will get roughly five cents on the dollar after everything is liquidated. Hundreds of senior residents in Hamilton have lost their nest eggs- all because they invested in the most trustworthy man in the friendliest town in the nation.
First, they lost their retirement funds, now their homes are expected to be devalued, and the town now has to deal with a mystery investor who purchased the entire distressed portfolio.
The pact was signed almost a hundred years ago and is based on a formula that is impossible to achieve in modern times. While the population of the upper Colorado states hasn't grown significantly since the pact, the population of Arizona has grown from 450,000 to over 7,000,000. Nevada has grown from under 100,00 in 1930 to over 3,000,000, while water allocations remain the same.
Anyway, on way back I ask first mate what that one ugly big white building that sticks out like a sore thumb on the shore is……. It’s a ‘bitcoin mining building’!
