I find it humorous that the one thing it immediately falls back to a human for is checking in for a mobile order. You’d think that would be the easiest thing to automate since it already has the complete order!

How would this hand over taxpayer dollars? The 50% stake would come from a one-time tax on stock that hands over that stake; it doesn’t call for forcing the companies to sell to the government.

That’s not really how trials for treatments like this work. The non-experimental groups would get standard of care/a comparator which would be used to determine efficacy. It would be unethical to give sugar pills to patients with advanced NSCLC.

Edit: yep https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12568215/

They shouldn’t, but it would not surprise me if many especially smaller businesses have claimed customer cash donations as their own. Not sure how charitable the government would be with them if it was noticed, though.

The business cannot use a round up charity donation for a tax deduction. They act as a holding agent. It’s not counted toward their income nor does the donation affect their income tax. You as the customer donating are the only one eligible to claim it for tax deduction, though it’s usually way too low to be worth the effort.

A reasonable criticism is that they will often on the PR side spin it as money they have raised, not always emphasizing how much customers are responsible for rather than them.

The growth ponzi scheme in action.

The last one I went to also. There was a dedicated section along the march route where a local pro-Palestine group was set up. There were speakers after the march, one of which was representing that group as well. A few other speakers also recognized them to much applause.

Perhaps some specific local chapters decided to sweep this issue under the rug, or perhaps the one local to me ignored a directive to do so.