I actually work in the SF housing industry, and worked at a housing site in SF that was converted to permanent supportive housing during COVID. In that case, barely 30% of the people even showed up to their intake appointments.
charonn0
joined 1 year ago
In reality, getting them to accept services and help is the #1 obstacle to getting them services and help.
It's not that it's an inconvenience, it's that it seems wrong. Like we're brainwashing children into venerating the state.
Be, is, are, was, am, were, being, been... are all the same word.
When in Vegas sell light bulbs.
Ask Robespierre how that works out in the end.
Some people need practical advice.
-George Carlin
What exactly are they trying to accomplish? The article talks about sending entangled photons down a fiber optic... but that just sounds like ordinary fiber with extra steps.
The TOS doesn't say anything about crimes like murder, and of course you can't waive that anyway.
What it does say is that any disputes arising out of the use of their website are subject to arbitration. If the plaintiff is correct and Disney is liable because they posted the menu on their website, then that would be a dispute arising out of the use of their website.
The plaintiff doesn't say that Disney owns it, though. They are basing their argument on the fact that Disney posted the restaurant's menu on their website. The website is also under the Disney+ TOS. So, if the plaintiff is correct and Disney is liable then the TOS probably applies.
Certification of homeless status from the city (already acquired if they were referred to us) and proof of income (if any).