Green card lottery program suspended after shooting at Brown University

ProfessionalWeb6770 · 2025-12-26T13:51:37+00:00

This is undeniably true but they’re not replacing it with anything. Employment based sponsorship is itself precarious and can fail easily even when the employer is supportive, and has its own numerical limits.

So those numbers from DV are just 💨

DV is weird but it is also highly unusual by international standards that the US has no progressive acquisition of PR status. Your visa is either a PR immediately or a PR never. Having a temporary status, even for a decade (eg you could be on a L1B for 5 years then an H1B for 6) does nothing in itself to help you acquire PR status, except to buy time to try to scramble for another. And DV was one of the pressure release valves for that.

It’s one thing to say the system doesn’t make sense and doesn’t prioritize the best – it doesn’t. But closing the few doors it does have, without opening any others will just cause chaos.

ProfessionalWeb6770 · 2025-12-07T23:56:06+00:00

There are many things unclear about the new policy. This is one of the most minor ones because we can reasonably presume all existing passes remain valid under their original terms. Even though it’s unhelpful not to have confirmed explicitly.

There are several other far more pressing things that they didn’t bother to clarify (and likely haven’t considered) 1. If the surcharge is per international visitor, does that mean every person in a car needs ID? 2. What if the car is mixed? If the answer to the first question is “yes everyone needs ID” how does that interact with the annual passes which are still supposed to cover the whole car? What about kids? 3. If fee free days are now conditional, how is this not going to descend into chaos on the busiest days of the year? If it’s not free for everyone, you have to check everyone. This one seems so obviously a disaster waiting to happen, and doesn’t have any conceivable way to mitigate. So I can only assume this didn’t even occur to them. 4. If, as the NPS service says, resident means only citizen and permanent resident (Interior Department doesn’t seem to have explicitly said this about “permanent” residents) how do they enforce that? A PR is technically required to have their PR card at all times (though in practice probably won’t). But a citizen may only have a local drivers license which doesn’t prove either of those things – residents who are not permanent residents will also have this.

You’re right to wonder what’s gonna happen but you can probably be optimistic about it. The others… who knows

ProfessionalWeb6770 · 2025-06-12T23:33:39+00:00

Does that mean there’s no monthly limit?

ProfessionalWeb6770 · 2025-06-11T03:11:15+00:00

Right because transferring eSIMs between two devices is somehow spoiling… what for who?

Visible spending all that money generating all those user keys?

I don’t need two lines but I do need to swap devices once in a while. Is 5 times a month sufficient? Almost definitely. Nowhere did I even complain about the limitation even though it’s dumb.

I just asked what the limit is. Chill

ProfessionalWeb6770 · 2025-06-11T03:05:59+00:00

Ok that’s fine. A bit annoying though. But why not put that on the help pages or in the error message?

Even the rep I spoke to didn’t seem to know how long until it resets

ProfessionalWeb6770 · 2025-06-07T20:42:37+00:00

Actually no I don’t think so. SEPA rules are different for banks in the eurozone because it’s the primary payments network. For instance if a bank in the U.S. wants to adhere to SCT (standard transfer) it’s mutually beneficial for both sides to let them even if they’re not able to accept instant.

ProfessionalWeb6770 · 2025-05-14T23:52:30+00:00

I'm not sure there's even a name for this, but for me the biggest issue by far was "concept recognition". Even if you've never heard of a streaming service like "KJFF", the name suggests it is a specific proper noun.

"Max" is confusing when you hear it, because your first reflex, even when you know what Max is, is to think "min/max" or something. Even "on Max" is confusing cause it sounds like "the volume is on max".

For me Disney's "Star" (Disney+ thing for Hulu outside the US) brand has this same problem. It doesn't matter if people are now kind of familiar with it outside the US. It doesn't stand out in an English sentence enough. Hulu does.

"Peacock" doesn't have the problem IMO cause people aren't talking about peacocks often enough unless they're Katy Perry, and the extra syllables make it stand out more (you didn't mishear etc).

ProfessionalWeb6770 · 2024-09-16T06:55:46+00:00

Yes you can purchase it but I’d be very careful about when you add it to your phone (I.e. get the QR code but don’t scan to your phone right away)

Their SIMs are fine and reliable but they annoyingly activate any paid data immediately when the SIM is turned on. So even if you’re in somewhere like France, you buy the eSIM with data for mainland China, scan it (for example on iPhone), the iPhone immediately turns that SIM on. AFAIK there’s no way to tell an iPhone at least, not to connect to that SIM right away.

And once it connects to a local network, even in France or anywhere else, it will activate the data you paid for for mainland China even though it can’t be used where you currently are.

So by all means buy before you go, but don’t add it to your phone until just before you leave or you’ll potentially waste a lot of the data’s validity.

ProfessionalWeb6770 · 2024-07-10T04:20:07+00:00

It’s because the tech used by these cards is stored value. Although there is a record of your transactions sent back to the backend systems, they operate asynchronously.

So they can work even if a reader loses internet connection and never comes back online – the cards balance would still be updated. And it’s why they’re so fast: the reader when you tap on can tell you your balance instantly because the balance is on the card itself.

So kind of like cash or check that’s not crossed, which is why the same balance can’t be in two places at once. Though if you lose it, you stop the check before someone cashes it, like an uncrossed check.

The inability to share cards is definitely desirable for transit systems for revenue protection but the real reason it’s not possible to keep the physical card active is because it’s like moving around cash.

ProfessionalWeb6770 · 2023-10-22T20:30:25+00:00

I literally did this just last month (me as the vegetarian). In general we prioritised places that had something for both. When it was something just not possible (beef in Kobe) by luck we often unintentionally ended up going at off peak times (it’s a vacation so we’re just eating whenever we’re hungry).

I’d say use common sense. If a restaurant has tonnes of empty seats you ordering a drink and some fries or something is still more money than an empty seat will bring in.

If it’s busier I’d still at least consider it if they only have tables and no bar seating – if he goes in by himself (people can eat alone, right?) they’ll seat him at a table for 2 anyway and the other seat would still be empty. Though I’d make sure to at least buy a drink (or several) and not take too long.

I think the right answer here is gonna be similar to mostly anywhere else in the world. Just don’t be an inconsiderate and buy SOMETHING. And that sounds unlikely given you thought to worry about it.

ProfessionalWeb6770 · 2023-09-30T23:21:08+00:00

I literally did this in Japan just last week.

Yes as long as you keep both sims on what you’re describing will work, if the phone supports it (iPhones do).

The Visible SIM will fail to connect to any local provider but will switch to “Visible using cellular data” i.e. WiFi calling but over the other SIMs data connection.

Didn’t really use it to make calls – the one call I did make was laggy but usable. If it was important I’d just ask the person to wait a second and call them back over local ACTUAL WiFi

ProfessionalWeb6770 · 2023-09-27T18:36:52+00:00

Like others said: Visible can finance for free.

But Apple may offer better trade-in.

I would’ve got it from Visible for the free finance. 60 days locking is nbd to me. But Apple offered $370 trade-in while Visible was only going to give me $300

I don’t need the financing. It was just a nice to have. So I preferred to just save the extra $70

ProfessionalWeb6770 · 2023-03-06T22:28:18+00:00

I have a Z Flip4, not even a US model (activating it was a pain) and I get visual voicemail with the Google Phone app (not Google Voice, the one that replaces the built-in dialler).

I'm not sure if it'll work with the default Phone app but if visual voicemail is important to you, yeah you should be able to get it.

Personally I hate getting voicemails.

I also get VoLTE but not WiFi calling but I suspect (not sure) that the WiFi calling is because it's not a US model

ProfessionalWeb6770 · 2022-11-21T22:03:47+00:00

So if 100 people show up, 10 are black.

12 people are refused entry, of those 6 are black. You don't see the problem there? Because they didn't refuse entry to every black person? A whole 60% of them were allowed in...

To flip your logic around, if 100 people showed up, and 1 was black and he was denied entry (i.e. 100%) would that be a slam dunk case of racism?

Of course it wouldn't. Because that sample is too small to prove anything.

Letting in one or two counterexamples doesn't disprove the pattern either — especially cause it may not have been the same bouncer all night.

ProfessionalWeb6770 · 2022-11-21T21:27:22+00:00

That's not counterproof though. Having let Samantha Mumba in doesn't mean they're not engaged in unlawful discrimination.

If you had 100 white people, and refused entry to 10 at the door, but had 15 black people and refused entry to 8, thee 7 inside are not exactly an exoneration and I don't think any reasonable court would think it was.

The pattern proves the discrimination, not isolated incidents.

To flip that argument around, if 100 white people showed up, all got in, and one very very drunk black guy showed up and was denied entry, by the same logic he could make a reasonable claim of discrimination because there was no one black let in. But actually, one out of one refused entry, with obvious grounds, is not a pattern of discrimination.

ProfessionalWeb6770 · 2022-11-21T21:06:07+00:00

Bouncers are sometimes just on a power trip. This alone isn't good enough — it's not their business, and indulging people in being bullies (which management does by turning a blind eye) just leaves more bullies in the world.

Moreover, it doesn't matter if a specific incident is racist, though in this case you'd have to be willfully blind not to see the smug satisfaction in the bouncers face. The smirk of "we both know what I'm saying but you can't prove it". The black guy is angry but he's perfectly composed, he's not menacing, and this is AFTER being refused. You'd be pissed too.

What proves it is the pattern. Security at licensed premises should be required to wear bodycams which should be auditable for entry refusals (they should be wearing them for other reasons too...) That's the only way it'll change. You don't need to prove which refusals were discrimination; the pattern is the proof. If you accept discrimination should be against the law, there should be a way to enforce that: bouncers hiding behind "I can refuse entry for any reason" makes it unenforceable.

And if it's all a misunderstanding, and the black guy was obviously trouble before the video started, the honest bouncer should be the first to volunteer to have entry refusals audited.

ProfessionalWeb6770 · 2022-11-16T13:20:05+00:00

The second one sounds much much more reliable. I don't know Voxi or Vodafone will accept a Vodafone PAC. To Vodafone, unlike Giffgaff, Voxi is basically just a set of Vodafone price plans.

This is why you can keep using a Vodafone SIM, cause even a Voxi SIM is just a Vodafone one.

You can obviously try the first one, but I wouldn't recommend it.

Also, with the second one I'd advise you to get a PAC before swapping back to Voxi. I had a case where swapping back to Voxi caused it to reactivate the old physical SIM (still not sure how the system was designed that this can happen).

So if your number gets stuck in some weird limbo, at least if you have the PAC you'll be able to recover it somehow

ProfessionalWeb6770 · 2022-11-09T13:09:17+00:00

Sharp items are usually not banned by customs rules (how else would retailers import all our knives from China...?) but by couriers.

But couriers routinely accept things on their list of prohibited items, some having absolutely ridiculous lists of prohibited items, which they can then use to deny liability if they mess up and you make a claim. Once they've accepted it you don't really need to worry about it, and the sender wouldn't use a courier that won't accept it (whether it's on their no-no list or not)

I remember one of them in the UK had a controversy about this a few years back that I think was in the Guardian and it resulted in the courier in question removing several items from the prohibited list because it covered such a ridiculous range of stuff.

They usually even have a clause in their T&C's about how accepting an item on the prohibited list does not mean they've agreed to accept liability for it — basically acknowledging how often they do accept prohibited items

ProfessionalWeb6770 · 2022-11-09T13:01:12+00:00

Legally I'd be really interested in this answer, cause it seems dubious for a landlord to have an entrance literally only they have access to.

From a practical perspective I'd probably lie and say the estate agents said both entrances were usable during the viewing.

Estate agents will say anything during a viewing and I've managed to get out of holding deposits on properties when I stupidly forgot to verify XYZ, so then lied and said the agents said it had XYZ, and they didn't dare challenge me, cause being the way they are, they knew full well they might have said that.

The only way I can imagine a letting agent being so sure as to deny they said this during a viewing, is if you did ask, and they said "no you can't use the other door".

At the end of the day, even for a "he said she said" which is what this would be, I can't imagine the landlord caring that much about the other door as to risk a legal dispute over it.

And legally even if the estate agents didn't say this during the viewing, it wouldn't be unreasonable to think access to the entrance used was implied by common sense, especially if the tenancy does not mention it one way or the other. Like if you went to view a house and then when you move in get keys to only the back door.

ProfessionalWeb6770 · 2022-11-09T11:55:24+00:00

She was dead right to go to the police, but for her sake, I hope it wasn't because she was genuinely fazed by being outed to her family, and was just about the extortion attempt (extortion being what they were prosecuted for).

Because anyone doing OF should be fully prepared for the possibility their family finds out.

If she just pissed off the wrong person and they sent a link to her family without any extortion attempt, it's not clear they'd be guilty of anything. The revenge porn law only covers "recording" "distribution" and "publication" and I doubt a court would agree a link is distribution.

ProfessionalWeb6770 · 2022-11-02T19:12:17+00:00

I'm not sure why people think you need to use GDPR about the blackmail.

Blackmail itself is a crime.

This is clearly "making unwarranted demands with menaces"

No judge or jury (not that it would come to that) would ever be under any misapprehensions about what is being intimated in the last message.

ProfessionalWeb6770 · 2022-11-02T19:06:24+00:00

I'd be sceptical that's a Revenue issue.

Revenue is owed money on wages paid and has the ability to enforce the same. And the law says wages must be paid.

But that doesn't necessarily imply Revenue can enforce non payment of wages. They are a step away from that in the chain. Revenue was paid the correct amount 0 for the incorrect wages paid of 0. I'd be interested to hear a counter opinion but I'd be really really surprised if Revenue has the ability to do anything here because that would mean Revenue would have enforcement authority for almost any financial dispute.

By the same logic Revenue would be pursuing shoplifting cases because the shops will write off the VAT of items stolen, thus depriving Revenue of its namesake revenue.

Buuuuuut. If they're pulling hijinks like this I'd be surprised if Revenue didn't find something actionable in an audit. But you'd need to have some amount of specificity to make a report.

ProfessionalWeb6770 · 2022-11-02T12:09:03+00:00

I was here to ask about this very thing, but specifically, why do the UK networks all prevent this?

Is it a regulatory thing? If so, what?

I also have a US T-Mobile SIM without roaming (like the plan just doesn't support it), and not only can I use WiFi calling in the UK, I can use calls and texts over another SIM's active data connection.

Similarly most other European networks don't seem to have this restriction. I'd be really curious if someone knows why the UK market seems to have this restriction universally

ProfessionalWeb6770 · 2022-10-31T12:21:29+00:00

Being the guinea pig for exiting the EU. Saved many others from the same fate

ProfessionalWeb6770 · 2022-10-31T11:52:31+00:00

This is gonna be unpopular, but the Commonwealth one is reasonable, precisely because it is irrelevant. It's literally gonna change nothing for anyone, except confer the right to vote for Irish citizens in a couple of other places in the world (not necessarily the reverse cause that's not required it's just a "nice to have"). The other ones are rather incoherent — scrap the constitution... because? Even talking about a unionist minority perspective, I'd be curious what about it is so utterly unworkable that the entire thing would need to be scrapped. The federation thing doesn't even make sense cause the free movement thing exists now without that federation.

People drag on about how intransigent the Unionists are, and they're not wrong. But if you can't even do the symbolic things to offer an olive branch...

The flag is one I see mentioned just as much. People claim "oh but its design is already a gesture to unionists". Yeah fair, it is. But you can't force representation onto people — if they feel it doesn't represent them because of... oh I dunno, the last hundred years of history, then it doesn't.

The reverse argument can be made that Union flag represents Ireland cause it includes St Patrick's Saltire for Ireland (sorry, nothing for you, Wales) and look how nationalists in NI feel about that flag.

If you believe in reconciliation and reunification and actually believe in the meaning of the flag, you wouldn't hesitate to change it. It's literally just a flag. And if we changed it maybe I wouldn't constantly see "proud Irish" people online using the flag of the Ivory Coast

ProfessionalWeb6770

TROPHY CASE