Micron Technology is a world leader in memory and semiconductor technology.
by MicronTechnology via Endless Supplies .De - Brands
Endless Supplies Corporation liefert weltweit, bietet Angebote am selben Tag und enthält CPUs, Speichergeräte, Notebooks, Server, Monitore, Büroausstattung, Computer, Motherboards, Grafikkarten, Displays, Wireless Networking, Cases, Unterhaltungselektronik, Software und mehr. E-Procurement-Systeme für B2B, B2G und B2C. Mailen Sie uns heute.
Nearly 41,000 former students of now-defunct for-profit educator Corinthian Colleges will soon receive refunds for the private student loans they received to attend college, after a coalition of state attorneys general and federal agencies reached a $183.3 million settlement with Aequitas Capital Management, the issuer of these loans.
New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman announced today the settlement — reached by 13 state attorneys general and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau — essentially canceling or writing down all outstanding balances for former students of Corinthian.
For instance, students who have fallen into default and whose campuses closed as a result of Corinthian’s bankruptcy will have their debts canceled. The remaining students will have 55% of their Aequitas loan discharged, including any past-due interest.
This, the AGs estimate, will result in each former student receiving between $6,000 and $7,000. The settlement must still be approved by the Oregon federal court overseeing the Aequitas receivership.
Prior to Corinthian College’s demise, the school relied heavily on federal student aid. However, the so-called 90/10 Rule, schools can only derive 90% of their revenue from federal funds. This means they must find a way to collect 10% of their revenue from other sources.
To do this, Corinthian entered into an agreement with lender Aequitas Capital Management. Under the deal, Aequitas provided private student loans to Corinthian students. Corinthian then agreed to buy back all loans that defaulted within a specified period, eliminating Aequitas’ risk of losses from defaults.
The AGs and CFPB alleged that Aequitas made the loans despite knowing that Corinthian students were unlikely to be able to repay the loans. The loans had a default rate of 50% to 70%.
“Aequitas Capital Management took advantage of their ambition and schemed with Corinthian to saddle these students with high-default loans at the now-bankrupt college,” New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said in a statement. “This was nothing more than a sham that victimized unwitting students and deceived the government and taxpayers.”
In recent months, several states and the federal government have worked to refund borrowers hundreds of millions of dollars in student loans taken out by those attending now-defunct for-profit colleges.
However, a majority of these refunds are related to federal student loans, and the so-called Borrower Defense rule, which allows students at failed schools to appeal to get out of their federal loan obligations.
Related: You Can’t Discharge Your Student Loans In Bankruptcy Because Of Panicked 1970s Legislation
This rule, however, does not apply to private student loans.
Still, at least one college in the last year has forgiven private loans. In Sept. 2016, Bridgepoint Education, the operator of for-profit colleges Ashford University and the University of the Rockies, was ordered to forgive $23 million in student loans to resolve allegations it deceived students into taking out private student loans that cost more than advertised.
The most effective scams take advantage of our greed, so it’s always good to have a reminder that deals that seem too good to be true probably are. The problem is that even if you know that an amazing deal from a seller who just joined Amazon last week and has no feedback is a red flag, Amazon’s buy box doesn’t necessarily understand this.
The problem isn’t necessarily Amazon’s fault, Buzzfeed reports. The e-commerce megastore bans bad sellers when they’re reported, asks new sellers for detailed information, and issues refunds to customers who are ripped off.
In a statement to Buzzfeed, Amazon explained its policy: “In the event that sellers do not comply with the terms and conditions they’ve agreed to, we work quickly to take action on behalf of customers.”
The problem is that scammers are very, very determined.
“As soon as Amazon sets up a way to identify these sellers, they have a way to get around it,” a consultant to Amazon sellers who used to work for the site told Buzzfeed. It’s variously compared to “cat and mouse” and “whack-a-mole,” but doesn’t seem like much of a game to customers who receive counterfeit goods or nothing at all.
Buzzfeed looks at this from the point of view of sellers who have to compete with phantom prices. One seller of board games explained that Amazon asks sellers complaining about potentially fraudulent competitors to perform “test buys” from them and see what happens.
This spring, he made 33 test buys, and 27 of them were scams. The seller might claim that packages were delivered to the wrong address, or there was no evidence that they were shipped at all.
One customer shared a scam with Buzzfeed that we hadn’t heard of before: Sellers who ask for payment on an Amazon gift card on a site that looks like Amazon. One user reported that a vendor with a great deal on a camera she wanted requested that customers e-mail them before purchasing the item from the site.
She did so, and was instructed to buy an Amazon gift card and submit the number. The seller later asked her for another gift card for shipping and insurance, which she sent.
When she contacted Amazon, they knew nothing about the transaction. She was able to obtain a refund eventually, but take this as a warning that when you’re shopping on Amazon, you shouldn’t carry out the transaction over email.
Competition in broadband and cable is scarce at best. That’s in part because when a new player does try to build service somewhere, incumbents like AT&T will pull every legal maneuver they can to try and block it. But one court has now ruled on a contentious case in Louisville, KY, throwing out AT&T’s lawsuit and paving the way for competition to come to town.
Running new wires, for a new broadband or TV service, is an expensive and complicated proposition. So when cities like Louisville want to pave the way for a new player to come to town, they pass rules making the process simpler.
One common regulation is called a One-Touch Make-Ready ordinance. Basically, they change the rules about city utility poles so that a new “attacher” can come string their wires up in one literal touch, without having to first get every existing incumbent to come move their own cable a few inches. The only caveats are that newbies have to give fair warning first, they can’t actually interfere with a cable or the service it provides. (You’re allowed to slightly shift existing cables, not cut them.)
With an ordinance like that in place, a company like Google Fiber can attach their own cable all the way down the street without first having to get the phone company, the cable company, the electric company, and anyone else who runs cables in an area to come each move their own wires ever so slightly first — a process that takes basically forever and costs a lot of money.
Louisville passed one such ordinance in early 2016, hoping to encourage Google Fiber to provide service in the area. But the incumbent telecom companies — AT&T Charter — both filed suit.
AT&T filed its lawsuit against the Louisville government in Feb. 2016.
The company made several claims about why it thought the city’s rule was unlawful. In short, it argued that the city violated two state laws and one federal one. The FCC, however, formally sent a letter to the court (via the Justice Department) effectively saying that AT&T’s claim about the federal rule was bunk.
“There is no conflict between the federal pole-attachment regulations and the Louisville ordinance,” the FCC concluded after laying out the relevant laws.
District Court judge David Hale pretty much agreed with the FCC. Ruling in favor of the city, he dismissed AT&T’s claim [PDF].
Hale laid out all his legal reasoning in his opinion [PDF]. Neither AT&T’s federal nor local legal arguments hold any water, the judge determined, and so the court “concludes that the ordinance is valid and that Louisville Metro is entitled to summary judgment.”
AT&T can appeal the ruling if it chooses to. A spokesman for the company told local media, “We are currently reviewing the decision and our next steps.”
Google, meanwhile, said in a statement that it is “thrilled” with the decision, adding, “We have long said, and continue to believe, that local governments have the right to determine how to manage their rights of way and create processes that pave the way for broadband choice for their residents.”
Although Google Fiber ceased expanding earlier this year, the company has said that it will continue to serve any city that where it already has a presence or has a build-out in progress. That seems to include not only Louisville, but also Nashville, which is facing extremely similar lawsuits to its own one-touch ordinance from both Comcast and AT&T.
For many whiskey connoisseurs, enjoying their favorite brown alcohol any other way than neat is bordering on sacrilegious. But according to science, a bit of water makes the libation taste even better.
While whiskey aficionados have long held that adding a few drops of water to your drink will allow the aroma and flavors to bloom even more, there hasn’t been much science to back it up.
That is until now. A team of Swedish chemists set out to find out why and how dilution enhances the taste of whiskey.
Writing in a study published in Scientific Reports, researchers said they performed computer simulations of how water and ethanol mixes with a molecule called guaiacol, which helps give Scotch its distinctive, smoky taste and smell.
They found that ethanol molecules and guaiacol molecules tend to stick together, and are both “hydrophobic” — which means that don’t mix uniformly with water.
The researchers’ simulations aimed to determine at what ethanol levels had the most impact on guaiacol, or rather, the taste and smell of whiskey.
When the whiskey with an ethanol concentration of 59%, the taste and smell was mixed throughout.
In a glass of whiskey, which typically exhibits alcohol concentrations of 45% or 27% if diluted, guaiacol will thus be found near the liquid surface, where it greatly contributes to both smell and taste of the spirit.
“This indicates that the taste of guaiacol in the whiskey would be enhanced upon dilution prior to bottling,” the researchers wrote.
It should be noted that the report does not mention if ice would provide the same effect as water, although, as we all known, the key ingredient in ice is, well, water.
In the end, the researchers believe that their simulations found that the higher the ethanol concentration at the time of bottling, the better the whiskey will be when it is poured and diluted.
“Dilution of cask-strength whiskey improves its taste by increasing the propensity of taste compounds at the liquid-air interface,” the report notes.
But don’t expect your next bottle of whiskey to come diluted. Adding water to the libation before bottling would add costs, and it might not fit everyone’s preference. Because, after all, you should just drink your whiskey how you like it.
Like companies in just about every industry, the ride-hailing app Uber requires users to agree that they will take any disputes to an arbitrator rather than the legal system. And although you may never have noticed this clause, a federal appeals court has now ruled that customers receive “reasonably conspicuous” notice about the arbitration requirement.
In his opinion issued today [PDF], Judge Denny Chin of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals went ahead and blamed Uber users who don’t tap on the hyperlink and read the user agreement. (Never mind that 98% of users do the same.)
The plaintiff claimed that he had not done so, and the court accepted that he hadn’t read the terms and conditions before registering for an Uber passenger account. The question was: Was it his responsibility to know that by signing up for an account, he was agreeing to arbitration? The court concluded that yes, it was.
“As long as the hyperlinked text was itself reasonably conspicuous — and we conclude that it was — a reasonably prudent smartphone user would have constructive notice of the terms,” Chin wrote. “While it may be the case that many users will not bother reading the additional terms, that is the choice the user makes.”
Originally, the case was a price-fixing complaint [PDF] filed against then-CEO Travis Kalanick, accusing the company of conspiring with its drivers to price-gouge customers in need of transportation by using surge pricing, multiplying fares up to eight times the normal rate.
Uber argued that instead of an antitrust suit, the plaintiff and anyone else who believes that its pricing is unfair should individually take their cases to arbitration.
Arbitration, a stripped-down legal process where individuals are at a distinct disadvantage, arbitrators often work for the same companies, and there’s no way to appeal decisions.
Ironically, this opinion now means that the case heads back to a lower court, Reuters reports, where another judge must decide whether Uber waived its own arbitration agreement by fighting the original lawsuit in the regular court system.
A few months ago, a judge in California ruled the exact opposite: That Uber’s process is deficient, and customers don’t really agree to arbitration when signing up.
Earlier this year, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos revealed plans to “reset” the Gainful Employment rule meant to hold for-profit colleges more accountable for the education they provide students. Today, she continued tearing apart the rule, announcing the intention to allow colleges to continue enrolling students in programs that run afoul of the regulation.
In a notice [PDF] published in the Federal Register today, the Department of Education announced that it would “reduce the burden on institutions” by revamping the appeals process for colleges when their programs fail to meet the gainful employment standards for employment after graduation.
Under the Gainful Employment rule [PDF], for-profit educators must demonstrate their former students are making a living wage after they graduate.
For-profit colleges are at risk of losing their federal aid should a typical graduate’s annual loan repayments exceed 20% of their discretionary income, or 8% of their total earnings. Discretionary income is defined as above 150% of the poverty line and applies to what can be put toward non-necessities.
So for example, say the typical recent graduate of a career education program earns $25,000. That student would need to average annual student loan payments less than $2,000, or the school would be at risk for losing federal financial aid.
Additionally, institutions must publicly disclose information about the program costs, debt, and performance of their career education programs so that students can make informed decisions.
The rule allows schools found to be in violation to appeal the findings if they believe the program graduates earn more than the federal data indicates.
The Department’s new proposed changes appear to tip the appeals process in the college’s favor.
Currently, a school has 60 days to appeal findings that their programs are in violation of the Gainful Employment rule. In the case of this year, schools had until March 1 to file; however, that date was pushed back to July 1. Under today’s announcement, schools found to be in violation of the rule now have until Feb. 1, 2018 to appeal.
In appealing these findings, a school must base their arguments on surveys that include at least 50% of program graduates or state data that uses at least 30 graduates of the program. Additionally, appeals based on surveys with few than 80% of a program’s graduates must demonstrate the respondents are representative of all grads.
Now when appealing, the schools would no longer have to meet a minimum percentage or number of represented students in their findings. Instead, DeVos would determine what is reliable on her own.
The Department’s notice claims that the changes are being made on a one-time basis to comply with a court order. However, the agency notes that the order only applies to members of the American Association of Cosmetology Schools.
Consumerist has reached out to the Department of Education for additional information on the changes. We’ll update this post if we hear back.
Several consumer advocacy groups characterized the Department’s most recent changes to the rule as an “illegal gutting,” noting the agency has taken action without going through the legally required process to amend regulations.
As a result of the changes, TICAS warns that failing programs will be able to continue to enroll students without warning them, and may avoid sanctions entirely based on data that could significantly overstate the earnings of graduates by excluding those with no or low earnings.
The Center For American Progress echoed TICAS’ sentiments, noting that weakening the appeals process is another “extralegal action by the Department of Education to avoid enforcing a rule its political leadership does not like.”
“The lack of any clear standards could let any appeal pass, regardless of how ridiculous or poorly designed it is,” Ben Miller, senior director for postsecondary equation at CAP, said in a statement. “The department should stop putting schools ahead of students and enforce the gainful employment regulation.”
The organizations claim that the Trump Administration’s own filing in response to a June 2017 lawsuit contradicts the validity of today’s changes.
In the filing, the administration notes that “the prospect of future rulemaking has no bearing on the validity of the current gainful employment regulations, which remain in effect unless and until they might be revised.”
“The Department may intend to dismantle student and taxpayer protections by rewriting the regulations, but until new rules are finalized and in effect, the current rule is the law of the land,” Debbie Cochrane, TICAS Vice President, said in a statement.
With a gig looming in Minnesota, Scottish band Belle & Sebastian found themselves without a drummer — because they accidentally left him one state away at a Walmart in North Dakota.
The band was passing through Dickinson, ND, on Monday night when they decided to stop at a Walmart to grab some water. That’s when, B&S frontman and founder Stuart Murdoch tells The Current, drummer Richard Colburn got off the bus, and — like a twee, Scottish version of Kevin McCallister from Home Alone — he was left behind on his own
“When I woke up a few hours ago, we realized we left our drummer in North Dakota,” Murdoch said. “I was coming out of the Walmart, and he [drummer Richard Colburn] was coming into the Walmart, and he was waving very happily, in a good mood. And that was the last time that we saw him.”
Colburn didn’t have a phone, but he probably figured his bandmates would be back for him, Murdoch said… except no one realized he was gone, because they all went to bed.
“There used to be a system, but because we all have mobile phones these days, everybody’s got a little bit blasé about it,” Murdoch explains, adding that they used to leave a pass on the passenger seat to alert the driver that someone was off the bus.
After waiting for hours for his bandmates to return, Colburn gave up and checked into a hotel to catch some Zs. Meanwhile, his friends put out the word that he was stuck in North Dakota.
Shit, we left Richard in North Dakota. Anyone want to be a hero and get him to St Paul, Minnesota somehow. The gig hangs in the balance..
— stuart murdoch (@nee_massey) August 15, 2017
Luckily, someone responded to that Tweet and gave Colburn a lift to the Bismarck airport, where he boarded a flight to Minneapolis — dressed in his pajamas and with only a credit card as ID — and made it to the gig on time.
Thanks for your help folks. We have Richard on a plane now, so everything is ok. He's in his pyjamas, sitting with a mimosa
— stuart murdoch (@nee_massey) August 15, 2017
Thankfully, Colburn was spared the fate of so many British drummers — like Joe “Mama” Besser, Richard “Ric” Shrimpton, and Scott “Skippy” Scuffleton — who have gone missing over the years.
For a band the size of Belle & Sebastian — it currently has seven full-time members, and often tours with additional horn and string players — it’s perhaps not surprising that Colburn’s absence went unnoticed.
But that’s no excuse for leaving a mate behind, so the band is implementing a new system to make sure no one gets abandoned again.
A new sign appeared on our bus. Should be ok now..
http://pic.twitter.com/mrGvBgq5ca
— stuart murdoch (@nee_massey) August 16, 2017
It’s worth noting that this incident did not come up on Walmart’s quarterly earnings call this morning.
(h/t A.V. Club)