This seems like a weird argument to make. We either pay collectively more for taxes for the roads we use, or collectively we pay WAY more for food, materials, and basically everything else if we tax trucks proportionally. Large trucks are carrying stuff, and the cost of that stuff is going to be directly associated with the cost of logistics.
Yes, some states haven't figured out what that looks like, but I really don't think the right answer is to dump all that cost on truckers. I would rather pay more for my car's operational tax, increased EV tax or existing gas tax on ICE, than disproportionately affect the price of groceries for someone living paycheck to paycheck.
It's dishonest to leave that conditional off the quote. The work and risk/stress involved in running a supportless shop is quite high. So if they are freeloading by using Rocky then Red Hat is also freeloading.
I do think it's funny that they weren't even number 1 on that list though. Guess they are at least getting a lot of volunteer work from other companies!
I think there's a happy medium, and civilian tourism probably isn't really the place to be pushing the safety envelope.
Science, discovery, boldly going where no one has gone before? Absolutely safety is going to be somewhat compromised. Taking rich people to the gawk at the Titanic? I, personally, think you're a bit of dick for MacGyvering a vessel together and calling it good enough.
Well dang I should've thought that through before asking the question. Should've realized up in the 220-230 range was going to be mcast reserved. Can't help but acknowledge the irony in not throughly reading the docs for the documentation reserved range though.
If it makes you feel better I had a similar, but not so exciting, situation happen to me in the past. So it's not entirely outside the realm of shit that happens. What does seem super fake is the doubling down, having it an SOP/SSP, and the tripling down without some crazy amount of escalating.
For example my experience went sort of like this:
Low Rent Auditor: Please supply a list of username and passwords for xyz systems.
Me(ccing boss and internal secops): No. Why are you asking me for that? <Links to internal SOPs, guidelines, basic common sense, etc>.
Low Rent Auditor: We need this for x box on y form. <attached>
Me (ccing their Sr. Auditor): That's not what that is asking for. Here's a copy of the PAM config. <attached>
I'll cry if/when Google buys some enterprise software I happen to support one more time. The appeal for a lot of niche enterprise software is responsive/knowledgeable tech support, willingness to implement feaure requests, and their ability to meet SLAs. All of these instantly drop to zero in a google buyout. Also there's no guarantee that the software will even exist in a usable way within a year.
I say this purely anecdotally, though, so take it as such. It has been a point of considerable personal frustration in the past. One instance was particularly painful because we had engaged the particular company looking for several custom features, and were basically buying a sizable percentage of the product they sold, with the promise that they would work with us implementing those features. When google bought them out, not only did the ability to get features implmented vanish, but so did the ones in flight.
Yes, some states haven't figured out what that looks like, but I really don't think the right answer is to dump all that cost on truckers. I would rather pay more for my car's operational tax, increased EV tax or existing gas tax on ICE, than disproportionately affect the price of groceries for someone living paycheck to paycheck.