The real problem here is that Facebook is operating in an area where it doesn't have a license and didn't bother to follow the laws that 2 million US real estate agents learned as part of the basic licensing. The onus has been on the platforms for years, but they've all been happy to take real estate ads because its lucrative despite the rules they have to follow. What makes Facebook so special in all of this, when small newspapers and one-person real estate shops have been able to follow these rules for decades?
The behavior of JAMA Editor-in-Chief Howard Bauchner is appalling and frightening. If he's so unwilling to deal with fraud in his publishing, what is he letting people get away with in his position as Vice Chairman of Pediatrics at Boston University. He seems far too keen to sweep things under the rug.
There's actually something called "disparate impact" in Fair Housing that covers this. So if someone does something like that, especially intentionally, and it impacts a protected class, they can be sued and fined.
Here in the US negligence is the biggest factor in accountability. In most cases if the driver wasn't negligent but the pedestrian was (by illegally jaywalking), then there's no criminal or civil consequences.
This prompted me to look up US pedestrian deaths. Some interesting numbers:
"According to the GHSA report, 74 percent of pedestrian fatalities happen at night, and 72 percent of those killed were not crossing at intersections."
"The GHSA report indicated that 15 percent of pedestrians killed each year are hit by a drunk driver, while 34 percent of pedestrians killed are legally drunk themselves."
I'd say we should put in more crosswalks and add lights and reflectors, but I've almost been hit twice by cellphone-distracted drivers in one like that in my neighborhood.
Something I find interesting is that so many states that are heavily democrat have such high income inequality. I've always hoped that states like Massachusetts, California and New York would do more to help the poor considering that they seem to have enough voter support to do that.
It's amazing that a company that Paul Graham co-founded is getting into bed with an authoritarian government notorious for its human rights abuses. To succeed in China you can't go against the government. So is he going to be pushing as hard for political change in China as he is in the US, or will he remain silent as his company reaps the profits?
I've been backing up everything in my google account and preparing for something just like this. When I first started making sure my backup was complete I realized that I had sent gmail invites out to a few friends. Now I guess I have to tell those same friends that it's time to start preparing for the day that Google decides to wipe out 14 years of their emails.
Apparently the author(s) think that you're safe if people are breaking into your house and stealing your things as long as you're not getting bashed over the head. Such an odd way to look at it. I don't think a lot of people who have had their house broken into feel just as safe afterwards. I do agree with their premise that prison for drug offenses is a terrible idea, but I hate that they lump drugs in with property crime. Property crime is definitely not victimless.
The author of this article claims to have received an award for at least one published medical study, and I think someone should take a serious look at it. If he thinks that this methodology is okay in a study, I can't imagine what would happen if someone used his medical study for anything but laughs.
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-bicyclists-drivers-...
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2011/05/20/1364622...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4518761/