dhork

I bet Walz stops at a donut shop tomorrow. I think he knows his way around one quite well.

Hah. It's not the first time a Republican has been flummoxed by a cash register.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermarket_scanner_moment

But someone in their org has to set up the spreadsheet, and more importantly, take the blame if the numbers don't match Management expectations, even if they are correct.

By outsourcing this to the software vendor, they also can outsource responsibility. Instead of Management leaning on the team to conjure "better" numbers, the team can say "We get these numbers from this independant vendor outside the company, who has all the info and is totally impartial, nudge nudge, wink wink". Questioning the numbers then becomes questioning the financial decision to employ the vendor in the first place. Just so much easier to do what the nice computer tells you to do.

In this case, "algorithmic" really means "shifting responsibility to a computer".

I had an experience like this earlier this year, when I went to buy a car. There was part of the financing regarding the state Sales Tax that I didn't understand. When I asked their "finance manager" about it, he said that the computer spit out all the numbers and they pay a lot of money for that software so the numbers must be correct.

I almost stopped the deal right there, but I went home and googled the answer, and they were doing it correctly after all. The deal was pretty good so I still bought the car. Still, it amazes me that businesses don't feel the need to promote managers who actually understand finance because "the computer does all the hard math".

The software vendor does have a point: the software doesn't set prices itself, it just makes suggestions based on the metrics it sees, and ultimately the property owners are the ones that raise rents. But I don't think the developer realizes the role it is playing in the feedback loop.

Landlords pay for this software to help them set "fair" rents. But if the software consistently sets rents that the landlord sees as too low, they will question whether the software is worth paying for, and the software vendor goes bust. On the other hand, if the software sets rents that are too high, landlords will see that software as working well, and will continue to use it. So the developer is incentivised to goose the numbers up a bit, knowing that landlords are free to set their rents lower....

... except we all know that's not what actually happens, particularly for these large real-estate conglomerates whose tenants are just lines in a spreadsheet. Some pencil pusher is just using these numbers from the software as-is, because there is probably more paperwork involved in justifying a rent change to their boss, while if they just accept the computers' numbers they can make it to Happy Hour a bit early.

It gets even worse when most of the real estate in an area is owned this way, because then the additional "the computer told me to charge this" surcharge gets "baked into" the overall market, and gives landlords who don't use the software a reason to raise rates, because of "the market". Then next year, it all rises again, because the software sees the overall increase in rates and thinks it's because of "the market" and not because of its role in the increase last year.

The incentives in this system benefit everyone but the renter. This may be a appropriate place for the government to step in and force change. Government is accountable to voters, and there are more voters who are renters than landlords.

Here is a link that puts the total a bit lower (43%) but has some interesting demographics

https://today.yougov.com/travel/articles/46028-adults-under-30-more-likely-have-us-passport

That assumes you ever felt the need to leave the country. Only 48% of Americans have one.

Thanks for linking to the forms themselves!

A quick look shows that both forms ask the voter to attest they are US citizens and warns them of penalties for filling out the form fraudulently, but using the State form requires the voter to show proof, while using the Federal form does not require the voter to show that proof. They can simply show some ID and proof of residence, which doesn't necessarily prove citizenship.

So if voting a fundamental enough right that you hold it inherently? If you move to a different district only to find that your dog ate your long form birth certificate, should you be disenfranchised until you get a new copy?

Maybe they have a standard best practice to encrypt all information like that, but I doubt it. Even if they did, I bet the password is something like "IHeArTkEnPaXt0n"

Gipson then directs employees to scan into the record all “court order sex change documentation that cannot be processed” and email the requesting person’s name and driver’s license or state ID number to “[email protected],” noting on the email subject line “Sex Change Court Order.”

Uh oh, now that the email is public they're gonna have to burn that inbox after the Internet gets done sending all of their "sex change court orders" to it.