How is that different from any regular election year?

That makes collusion okay. QED.

No.

You can also just pay your workers in scrip and then hire Pinkertons to kill them if they get uppity about it. It's hard not to become cynical when people seem almost willfully ignorant of the despicable history of capital in this country...

>in spite of this and the decades of overwhelming evidence

Where's all this "overwhelming evidence"? So far the only that's presented is "my university is pepsi only so there must be something shady going on" and "vendors buy me coffee so there must be administrators corrupting themselves and risking their 6 figure jobs for $5 worth of inducements"

edit:

>Edit: I'm shitlimited to five posts per X number of hours, so I'm going to respond here: the evidence is in TFA, thanks.

Searches for "bribe" and "kickbacks" don't turn anything up. If you're talking about the unsealed FTC complaint, that's anti-competitive behavior, but not the "kickbacks" that OP was talking about (ie. some administrator abusing their position of trust to personally enrich themselves). Both are bad, but they're not remotely comparable. For one, in the case of kickbacks, the organization and its members are harmed (through worse contracts), whereas for whatever walmart and pepsi agreed to, both benefited.

Don't you see, someone just has to say "this is not a bribe", and, like magic, they can finagle their way out of their corruption. "Bribery" has a very narrow definition, which conveniently doesn't apply to the corruption in question.

Block GCP, AWS, Azure, and various datacenter prefixen, and you're pretty much golden. There are scant few legitimate reasons a human being's traffic would originate from those hosts.

You can run virtual desktops in the cloud, like AWS's Workspaces, sold as a business rather than developer offering. AWS does publish the IP range those clients use, and I assume other similar offerings out there do the same.

I am working from a cloud desktop but I am only visiting corporate approved resources from that cloud desktop and I believe that is the case of most cloud desktop users as the whole point is to have a clear separation of duties.

Correct, but I don't think it's a safe assumption that approved resources wouldn't have a reason to block requests from the cloud.

I'm sure people who can afford to run virtual desktops in the cloud can also afford a phone/laptop/desktop to access sites that block those virtual desktops in the cloud.

I'm thinking more along the lines of people using virtual desktops assigned by their job, and those sites are part of their work. I don't feel like punting to BYOD is a good solution.

Everyone who has prayed for rain: thank you, your services are no longer required.

Weeping and gnashing of teeth because RAM is expensive, and then you learn that people buy 128 GB for their desktops so they can ask a chatbot how to scrape HTML. Amazing.

The more I've thought about it the RAM part is hardly the craziest bit. Where the fuck do you even buy a computer with less than 4 cores in 2025? Pawn shop?

isn't it ridiculous? This is hacker news. Nobody with the spare time to post here is living on the street. Buy some RAM or rent it. I can't believe honestly how many people on here I see bemoaning the fact that they haven't upgraded their laptops in 20 years and it's somehow anyone else's problem.

I may be out of the loop; is system RAM key for LLMs? I thought they were mostly graphics RAM constrained.

it's kind of hard to tell what your position is here. should people not ask chatbots how to scrape html? should people not purchase RAM to run chatbots locally?

Please absolutely do not use that ragebaiter to draw conclusions about poor people.

I don't need to use him. I know plenty of poors who routinely shoot themselves in the foot IRL.

Cognitive ability/IQ is actually a better metric for predicting poverty than socioeconomic background BTW.

No, it famously isn't.