I don't know Korea's laws but this would likely be illegal in the US, too. It depends on whether it could be proven that you knew that the stocks were issued in error. And even if it wasn't a criminal act, the company would be within their rights to recover the mistakenly issued stocks.
Right now, if he were able to convert all of his $241.8B to cash, then distribute it evenly among all of the employees at all of his companies, he could give each of his 146,000 employees $1.6M.
No one person should be that wealthy. I don't necessarily think that billionaires should be abolished, but I do think they should be paying a shit load more in taxes than they are.
Also, before anyone says it, yes, I know it's not as simple as converting his holdings to cash. I'm just saying "if it were possible".
Whether they have wifi on ship or not isn't the issue. Sometimes, when a ship goes into an operation, they will turn off all signals except passive or directed signals so that they can't easily be detected. Having a communications signal that isn't under the control of the ship's officers is a huge security risk during operations.
Someone is going to be court martialed over this.
Like, you hire a contractor to do work for you and ask them to let you apprentice for them at the same time and they go for it? I would love doing this so I don't have to hire a contractor the second time! What do you say to them to get them to agree?
Entropy Man would be a scary accidental villain. Just random acts of chaos as they go through life until enough shit goes wrong and they become persecuted. The they learn to use their powers for revenge against an unjust society.
I take it that you would argue that the media bias bot is worse than nothing?
I'm not arguing in favor of the media bias bot in particular here. I'm just kind of thinking about what might be a better solution. Given the fractured media landscape at the moment, it seems unreasonable to expect everyone to immediately have know the various biases of each news source. Having tools that help with that, even if they are themselves biased, seems like a good starting point for understanding the bias of different news organizations. Is there a better way to develop a similar tool that provides more useful information?
Okay, I can certainly see that perspective and, after reading the link posted by @ayyy@InEnduringGrowStrong@sh.itjust.works I can see how this scale is problematic in other ways since news bias isn't one-dimensional.
Is there a better way to educate people about the bias of particular new organizations, though? It seems unreasonable to expect everyone to develop their own individual assessment of every news organization. There are simply too many of them offering too many different spins. This attempt at providing something easily digestible seems like a reasonable starting point. It's certainly not perfect and has a lot of room for improvement but is it worse than nothing?
Thank you for the link, that was helpful!
This is an honest question because I see the media bias bot being consistently downvoted and don't understand why. Can you fill me in? Why is the media bias bot hated so much? It seems fairly reasonable in its assessments. For example:
- Daily Vox: Left with High factuality
- Huffington Post: Left with Mixed factuality
- MSNBC: Left with Mixed factuality
- NPR: Left-Center with High factuality
- Reuters: Least Biased with Very High factuality
- Forbes: Right-Center with Mostly Factual factuality
- Fox: Extreme-Right with Mixed factuality
- OAN: Extreme-Right with Low factuality
- Newsmax: Extreme-Right with Low factuality
- Infowars: Extreme-Right with Very Low factuality
- Conspiracy Level: Tin Foil Hat
- Pseudo-Sci Level: Strong
Tell me that there is an anti trust suit over this.
Ah, "buy" was a typo but it wasn't meant to be "boy". I know better than that. It was meant to be "guy".
Wait... Who is the socialist candidate?