Because Microsoft presented numbers that chuds think sound good, so they will want to buy their shares, pushing the share price up. The people who own shares but know the numbers are fud will shut up because idiots are buying their shares at a premium. The people without shares who know better won’t buy shares, which doesn’t affect the price, and Microsoft just replies nothing to their questions.

Depending on the specific flavour of Android, afaik. Not generally.

Pahlavi himself iirc never ruled and criticised his father who did, so not sure how correctly he can be characterized as an “autocrat”. He might well be genuine. But yes, it’s obvious that there’s foreign countries who’d much prefer him over the theocracy.

I only listed them here because they’ve used some externally linked sources which you can verify yourself, in one convenient article.

I don’t recommend them regarding any orher claims presented as facts (like the 12k dead number).

The share price might change, as that’s largely based on feelings instead of facts. Sure they didn’t sell as well, but they presented numbers that look better (even if they aren’t) so line go up.

There’s a ton of disinfo from both sides coming out of Iran at the moment.

https://www.iranintl.com/en/202601137586

Not sure how trustworthy this site is, but the examples given are pretty clear: doctored “live footage”, AI generated ‘pro-government marches’ and reusing footage from the Soleimani funeral.

Be careful trusting anything about Iran at the moment.

Well, only on the right screen sizes it is. Otherwise the ‘classic’ variant gets disabled.

The video you’ve shared (https://imgur.com/a/ZEDdeNA) is almost certainly in Iran. 13 seconds in you can see a car with an Iranian license plate (you can tell by the lettering + the blue block on the left). Iraqi license plates don’t have that. There can be a blue block on the left side for Iraqi plates (for government vehicles), but they have black lettering, not the white lettering seen here (which is present on Iranian plates, there’s the flag at the top and white letters at the bottom).

As far as I could tell the Shah guy isn’t actually intent on becoming a monarch (he was fairly critical of his dad) but wants to help Iran transition towards democracy. How he does that, no clue.

Still, apparently that guy is the dude most Iranians trust to take over. I say most, but it’s still barely 30% iirc; Iranians are pretty disillusioned with their (potential) leaders at the moment.

As a shareholder, you are financially incentivised to not question narratives the company presents if they supposedly present the company in a good light.

Suppose you do ask, the narrative unravels and the share price tanks. Congrats, you’ve just lost a buttload of money. Why would you do that?

No, best option is to applaud loudly, tout it in the press and watch useful idiots buy your shares at inflated prices.

The people who do ask the questions are the people the company doesn’t feel obliged to answer.

When the battery dies, the glasses continue to function as a traditional pair of single-vision specs, ensuring the wearer is never left in the dark or have safety compromised such as when driving or operating machinery.

In my head this works quite well as an animated short film.

He’s authored 60 repos on Github and has forked another 95.

https://github.com/marcj?tab=repositories&q=&type=source&language=&sort=

He also founded companies and used to be CTO: https://www.linkedin.com/in/marc-j-schmidt-957875110

So I suppose he’s both.

Some of them are protesting for it, judging by the pro-shah chants. Not sure how widespread it is though.

Some women visually prefer it for cultural reasons. This mostly goes for the US, in Europe it’s different. But most threads I can find state women prefer uncut penises because they feel nicer and self-lubricate better.

Erratic? She backed up, clearly turned the wheel away from the officers, and only once the car was fully turned away and no officer was directly in front anymore did she accelerate. The officers were never in any danger.

GNU Taler’s documentation already covers KYC laws.

For exchanges, yes. For merchants, no.

They would only need to wait 2 weeks if they specifically want to be able to reverse a charge, but AFAIK a merchant can take possession of the money much earlier, and can still send a refund to a buyer’s Taler wallet at any time as a separate transaction.

Merchants can’t take possession of the funds, the exchange determines when the money is sent. After that, according to the docs a refund will trigger a 410 Gone status code.

https://docs.taler.net/core/api-merchant.html#obtaining-refunds

It seems there is a template to offer a refund, but the customer would have to go and “accept” the refund manually, which is poor UX compared to every other payment method out there where this happens automatically.

I’m not sure how that’s a problem specifically? Why does it matter if they gain a little interest on it on the time that they have it until the merchant exchanges their tokens for the money? Is that worse than the fees associated with Wero?

It means exchanges are financially incentivised to keep hold of the funds for as long as possible, delaying payments. In a world that’s rapidly moving towards instant payments (like Wero), this means transferring money will happen at a snails pace. You can configure the wire deadline, but given that shortening it makes the refund UX worse I’m not sure it’s ideal. It’s weird to have this be a tradeoff anyway.

If you have a more clear source, let me know.

Fees differ per country, it’s based on what the previous most popular payment method offered. In NL it’s cheaper because iDEAL is fairly cheap. But here’s a source on BE costs: https://www.ing.be/en/business/payments/wero/wero

0.3% per transaction under €33.33, and a flat €0.10 for transactions of €33.33 or more.

Basically you pay a percentage, but it’s capped at a maximum transaction amount. Far cheaper than creditcards at least.

Taler doesn’t offer consumer protection, and the anonymous aspect might sound nice but KYC laws prevent merchants from accepting it (and in a lot of cases, knowing who the customer is is quite helpful from a merchant perspective).

But the real killer to me seems to be this (from the Taler docs):

It is possible for the merchant to refund a contract order, for example if the contract cannot be fulfilled after all. Refunds are only possible after the customer paid and before the exchange has wired the payment to the merchant. Once the funds have been wired, refunds are no longer allowed by the Taler exchange.

This basically means your payment method is dead on conception. Online stores in the EU are required to offer no-questions-asked refunds within 2 weeks. This means a store has to wait 2 weeks at minimum before they get their money (modern payment methods are instant or next-day, 2 weeks is exceptionally long). That’s a massive dealbreaker. It also means exchanges can make tons of money by keeping the transferred funds in their account and collecting interest on it.

It also weirdly means that refunds aren’t possible once a transfer is settled. That’s a weirdly brief window imo.

It’s also quite funny to me that Taler claims to be immune to chargeback fraud, when it doesn’t offer chargebacks in the first place. Makes it easy, don’t it?

I don’t really see why a consumer or merchant would necessarily want to use this over other options. Perhaps a restaurant might, or some other store that sells things that are intended to be consumed immediately, or a service provided immediately (like a theme park or cinema). But even then there’s other, more widely available options instead.

Wero is in a completely different space, doing primarily ecom payments instead. Taler doesn’t do what Wero does any better (or in many cases, at all it seems).

It’s sounds bizarre to me that this couldn’t be resolved by rebooting.

Then again, how do you reboot a car exactly? It’s not “off” even when the car is not started I suppose.

Ja