Interesting Links for 07-02-2022

[andrewducker]

Tug! Of! War! With! A! Lion!

(tags:lions games video )

Worst to come for food price rises, Tesco boss says

(tags:inflation food UK Doom )

Why the Queen should be more careful with official secrets

(tags:royalty secrets rickroll viaPatrickHadfield )

UK needs to shift to renewables to protect from energy crises

(tags:renewables electricity UK )

Inside Johnson and Johnson's secret plan to cap litigation payouts to cancer victims

(tags:business cancer OhForFucksSake law USA )

Some grammar walks into a bar...

(tags:jokes grammar language funny )

The human mind does not easily process the gulfs of time that humans have existed for

(tags:humans prehistory )

Comments

[cmcmck]

Historians have strange minds, I suspect, especially if they live in a landscape so old that parts of it were once the bottom of a prehistoric sea and have no fossils. :o)

Tug! Of! War! With! A! Lion!

[jack]

I liked the responses too. I admit, it's very possible to be misled, but that definitely looked like a lion having fun to me :)

Re: Tug! Of! War! With! A! Lion!

[andrewducker]

I've certainly had multiple dogs who loved that kind of thing. And I don't think a lion would do it if it wasn't enjoying it on some level.

Inside Johnson and Johnson's secret plan to cap litigation payouts to cancer victims

[jack]

I kept hesitating through the article. "why the strategy was so attractive: J&J could create a related-party bankruptcy to limit liability, while avoiding “the burdens” of declaring bankruptcy itself," I mean, yes, I assume trousering all the profit and shovelling all the liability into a separate company which immediately folds because it doesn't have any income is ALWAYS desirable for a company, whether they're a giant multinational or a couple of cowboy roofer brothers who sell the business to each other cheap whenever they want to push the reset button on any debts. I guess the question is, when is it fraud and when is it legal (and I don't know -- the article touches on precedent for when it's reasonable, presumably based on how much the company assigns to settle the losses, but doesn't go into more details)