what’s always annoying is that the state tax payers pay, which inevitably means some other program gets cut.
shrub for instance ( as governor ) once cancelled some car pollution air monitoring contract, so the company sued. his administration settled, and paid out of the texas epa… managing to undermine air quality twice with one go 
Cancel one of the infrastructure projects to cover the cost. They’re not going to fund it anyway. As long as the contract hasn’t been signed or it hasn’t gone out to bid - no biz can sue.
Self-checkouts at big retailers like Walmartand Costco could soon be a thing of the past, warn retail experts, and corporations are pinning it on crime.
“Warn”?
I welcome it!
… they’re still being expanded in this town 
In this part of the world they’re being “enhanced” with AI watching at all times and not letting you leave if it thinks you’ve done it wrong.
(This article is mainly about Western Australia, but it’s all over.)
About freaking time. Our Costco has more staff at the self checkouts than the main lines half the time. The positioning of the self checkouts also results in long backups blocking the entrance of the first few aisles.
Same at the Costco where I shop, which is why I call bullshit on the article’s angle of “due to theft”, at least at Costco. The self-check tech also is first generation, requiring everything to be placed in the “bagging area” and no handheld scanners for the giant packs of toilet paper. I refuse to use them. Good riddance!
I might buy that at Walmart, but not Costco. They check everyone’s receipt on leaving the store at Costco, and it’s not some cursory check done for show. They actually count the items in your cart and make sure it matches the number of items on your receipt. The reason they’re ditching it is because, as @sqlrob and @Wayward point out, it hasn’t enabled them to reduce staff, which is the only reason to have self-checkout in the first place.
Oh, I came into this thread because of Squid Game Challenge. A follow up on the potential lawsuit from some of the contestants. This is a legal analysis from a personal injury lawyer who also managed to interview an actual contestant, albeit one who is not threatening to sue. Warning: this YouTube lawyer doesn’t have nearly the production value of Legal Eagle, but he does know what he’s talking about as far as the law goes.
4-5 hours of shooting for the red light green game? that’s long for sure. also, kind of sucks that if you complained you were kicked off the show. while that’s somewhat understandable in a competition, that also pressures people injuring themselves especially when millions of dollars is on the line
it seems a bit morally questionable, even if it’s held to be legal. ( which of course was the point of the movie… )
Unlike the fictional version, though, these people apparently were fully informed about what they were getting themselves into. There was one woman in the red light green light game who, for some reason, stopped in a squatting position when it went red light at one point. They didn’t say in the episode how long she had to stay in that position, but she mentioned that her legs started really, really burning, and it was starting to get pretty painful, and so she just gave up and sat down, eliminating her from the game. I also don’t think the only reason that event took so long was moving cameras around to get all the shots they needed. I suspect they were having to manually look at the camera footage to see who moved and needed to be eliminated. I don’t think they had automated sensors doing that like in the fictional version.
Not all the games were that physically grueling, though. They did the cookie cutout game, and instead of tug of war, they did a human sized version of Battleship. Honestly, I’ve found the show to be a lot more watchable than I thought it would be. I think it’s significantly less toxic than the Bachelor, not that that’s a high bar.
Maybe you’d be better off if you didn’t waste $100 million on Joe Rogan?
His mother, Nakesha Harris, told reporters afterward she is disappointed prosecutors decided to retry the case.
“They’re wasting taxpayers’ hard-earned money,” she said. “We’re retrying a case with no physical (or) DNA evidence. All the witnesses recanted (and) changed stories, and the judge based his verdict off the testimony of a blind man.”
The pilot who pulled the emergency handles on an E175 earlier this year has had the 83 charges of attempted murder reduced to 83 charges of misdemeanor reckless endangerment after a grand jury refused to indict on the major charges. He’s also been released on bail and is travelling by car home to California pending his trials.
His pilots license has been permanantly revoked and he is no longer employed by Alaska Air. He has been told to stay away from drugs.
Jared McClain, an attorney for the Institute for Justice, said the commission’s decision isn’t a surprise.
“Judges almost never face any consequences when they violate someone’s rights — even when their most obvious errors have tragic results,” McClain said. “That’s why doctrines like judicial immunity are so pernicious. Immunity doctrines take away the one tool that victims have to hold government officials accountable.”
i love that they ruled out “incompetence.” i guess they didn’t consider maliciousness.
