At present this explicitly does not include a "lockdown such as we have seen in countries abroad."
I would recommend you not make plans which are contingent on that state of affairs continuing.
"What's the biggest change we're likely to see?"
Every public and private org in Japan will have a conversation tomorrow, and in lamentably many cases for *the first time* tomorrow, on what their coronavirus strategy should be. Some will act; some will start planning to act.
"Every" is a bit of an overstatement for effect here, but as of tomorrow it's hard to imagine e.g. a large corporation or city not having several hundred people working on this issue.
That is, unfortunately, not terribly hard to imagine as of last week or even this morning.
The press conference includes the first time I've heard the acknowledgement from on high (in Japanese) that asymptomatic people can be infectious, which is one of the most important facts for the public health response and which will likely surprise a lot of decisionmakers.
Request from the government to avoid moving from Tokyo/Osaka/etc ("as we've seen abroad during lockdowns") to regions of Japan because a) risk in Tokyo/Osaka/etc "if living life as normal" is low and b) high at-risk population in the regions.
(Both quotes approximate.)
Government clarifies that while compliance with government requests to avoid e.g. operating businesses considered at high risk to spread coronavirus is at the discretion of the business owner, that request could be made directly, by police, in the course of their official duties.
I will note for the benefit of Japanese speakers searching the transcript that the word 職務質問 was used by the questioner, and think your friendly neighborhood legal professional can explain why that is an important word choice.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The existence of YouTube does not make reading and writing less valuable. It gives children a constant companion who is responsive, preternaturally so, to their desires and curiosity.
(I devote a bit of brain space—not too much but I pray not to little—to making sure that constant companion does not make the entire world look like a pale imitation of itself, which would be wrong but could easily look accurate to the subjective experience of a child.)
“Any parenting tips?”
I do not have the constant fights about screen time some parents report, do not know how much of that is due to decisions I’ve made, and have one regret: we went two years without a TV due to moving and I should have made that permanent versus “completing.”
(In particular note the cap on cash back and the carveout for particular transaction types which some users are able to generate arbitrarily high amounts of or would naturally have arbitrarily high amounts relative to “normal” CC use.)
“How does this happen?”
Credit card PMs are extremely aware that there are multiple different personas for credit card use out there. One of them has a name in various banks, but you can think of them as Mercenary Financial Enthusiast.
If I can give a slightly more optimistic take on this: much of how commercial software development is done trades some resources for others, in ways that might not be rational for people with very different strengths than e.g. AppAmaGooFaceSoft or BigCo customers.
A lot of AWS services exist so that two teams don't need to have a meeting.
That *is not a criticism of either AWS or those two teams.* That is a preference one can have about time allocation and corporate structure, and capitalism will help you satisfy it.
If you are not constrained on organizational complexity, if meetings with yourself are free, then a lot of the standard stack that BigCo uses is both overkill and underkill at the same time.
So strange that card program managers make such a show of doing this careful balancing act when everyone who reads the Atlantic knows that the real source of rewards is cross-subsidization of elite cardholders by poor people. </sarcasm>
Less sarcastically: it’s a math problem conducted by people who are pretty good at math, and the marching orders they get are “In general and in steady state, all of our card programs should be margin accretive. Make it happen. If you can’t you’ll need a senior signoff.”
(The above is not private information from any particular issuer but rather is a pastiche representing industry standard practice.)
I think the so-called Bitcoin treasury companies have just reinvented exchange tokens: there is an asset with X real world utility but not naturally leverageable. It should flow to place in world where most leverage is bolted onto it; immediately incentive compatible. Repeat 100x
And then “Holy %}*]^ how did so much of it end up in a place with grossly deficient risk management?!”
(I understand that MicroStrategy is the opposite of leveraged exposure from the common shareholder’s perspective but if someone with hands on keyboard believes they are allowed leverage if they hold more exchange tokens then the model happens regardless of whether that is true.)
(n.b. This is extremely well-known among companies which have a business process where you sign things. Most of them use a signature to demonstrate solemnization rather than authorization or authentication.)
As I've mentioned previously, solemnization is a sociolegal tripwire to say "There are many situations in society and in business where you're Just Talking and up until this exact moment we have been Just Talking *and after this point* We Were Not Just Talking. Do you get it?"
People who are unsophisticated about this think that the signature is somehow preventing someone from retroactively changing the terms of the contract. People who are unsophisticated say thinks like "Oh use digital signatures to PROVE that that has not happened. Sounds great."