I have used Incogni for a few years now, I was a little worried after the first year things wouldn't be worth the price, but I'm noticing that there are data brokers who will happily remove you but not put you on a block-list, meaning that they will happily ingest your information again if it comes to them, and another request from Incogni will be needed to remove it again.
I'm on the fence about whether that's real value delivered from Incogni, but I do think overall it's working to limit some of the spread of my data.
> but not put you on a block-list, meaning that they will happily ingest your information again if it comes to them
So since you don't know if they information or not, you should start sending them delete request every second? You know, just in case they got new data since the last request and we know it takes a while to actually process those requests.
Sure; but when I join a team and they've already got a linter set up with stupid pedantic rules, they never seem to appreciate my complaints about it. "Oh god, can we not have that conversation again!". I understand. But nobody is happy.
Carpentry isn't my jam, but I've taken up piano. I love it.
I have similar feelings as GP about Black (probably the most popular python code formatter), which goes by the philosophy that linters should not be configurable because that just moves conversations about styles from the code to which rules to use.
Black also behaves decently wrt empty lines. It does have some opinions on that, like two lines between functions and in some other contexts, and at most one line elsewhere. But inside function bodies, it will collapse multiple consequent blank lines into a single one, but it will never remove them altogether, so it's still possible to use them to logically structure code.
I tried to emulate the math you showed, my Chevrolet Bolt EV emits 96g CO2 per mile when considering upstream emissions on the New Jersey electrical grid, my carbon tax on 96kg emissions per 1000 miles would be $17.76.
Seems about right. The EPA uses a conversion factor of 8887 g CO2 emitted per gallon of gasoline consumed. [1] Assuming 40 miles per gallon, as above, that's ~222 grams per mile for the theoretical ICE car, a little over 2x the emissions of your electric vehicle.
Incidentally, 2023 Bolt specs [2] indicate an efficiency of about 4 miles per kWh, and the EPA reference above states a typical US grid efficiency of 4.17 × 10^-4 metric tons CO2/kWh. This gives us 15.38 km per kg CO2. So ~105 kg of CO2 would be released by driving a Bolt for 1000 miles on typical grid sources. [3]
I'm surprised to learn the US grid is this inefficient. In theory, an ICE car with an efficiency of 85 mpg would emit less CO2 than an electric car. Obviously that's not reachable at this point, but a hybrid like a Prius that can hit 57 mpg cuts it a lot closer than I would've thought.
Selecting people with low self-worth that can be easily broken. You don't want a free thinker with vocal opinions and entitlement (warranted or not) working at your McDonalds - you want a drone that is just good enough to do the job.
Hiring process often is a reflection of work culture. Shitty process will remove candidates that won't fit the culture.
I think most of the jobs that use this kind of filtering are also low wage / low prestige where churn and training represent a significant fraction of the labor cost. So they are probably simply selecting for a certain degree of precarity & economic desperation, trying to exclude people who are looking for a little extra money to meet personal goals or fill periods between better paid work.
I'm trying to phrase this neutrally but IMO this motive is just as bad.
I too miss when a job could just be agreed upon labor for income and not this attempt to shackle a worker to some quasi indentured servitude.
There's that meme of "no one wants to work anymore" and meanwhile these entry level labor jobs act like they want to test for government clearance just to flip a burger or deliver mail.
I took a more general test at a job agency, as there was warehouse work, cleaning, assembly line and so on available.
I argued at the end that I had 100%, since 295 × 3 (or something) could not possibly be the answer given on the answer sheet, as the last digit wasn't 5.
They eventually found a calculator and found their answer sheet was wrong. Supposedly, no-one had noticed before, though now I wonder if it's possible it was a test of personality.
Probably not, as many people probably would find that question difficult on a test with questions like "Put Smith, Jones and Patel in alphabetical order".
Please ask your dad or whoever does the work on that website to update the home page so that the content does not do the reverse of its "intro animation" just because you scrolled back in the direction of the top of the page.
I was more distracted by that behavior and totally failed to get any value out of visiting your site.
I'm on the fence about whether that's real value delivered from Incogni, but I do think overall it's working to limit some of the spread of my data.
reply