#Rohits

[a2zsportsnews]

India vs South Africa, Key Matchups T20 World Cup 2024 Final: Will Indian spinners hold Klaasen, Miller? Rohit’s approach vs Jansen in focus

India, which has not won a World Cup for 13 years, will play first-time finalist South Africa in Barbados on Saturday. Ahead of a high-octane match between the two unbeaten sides in the tournament, here’s a look at the key matchups. Win toss, bowl ? Rohit Sharma has won the toss thrice and elected to field twice. | Photo Credit: DEEPAK KR/The Hindu Rohit Sharma has won the toss thrice and…

[mostlysignssomeportents]

The CFPB is genuinely making America better, and they're going HARD

On June 20, I'm keynoting the LOCUS AWARDS in OAKLAND.

Let's take a sec here and notice something genuinely great happening in the US government: the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau's stunning, unbroken streak of major, muscular victories over the forces of corporate corruption, with the backing of the Supreme Court (yes, that Supreme Court), and which is only speeding up!

A little background. The CFPB was created in 2010. It was Elizabeth Warren's brainchild, an institution that was supposed to regulate finance from the perspective of the American public, not the American finance sector. Rather than fighting to "stabilize" the financial sector (the mission that led to Obama taking his advisor Timothy Geithner's advice to permit the foreclosure crisis to continue in order to "foam the runways" for the banks), the Bureau would fight to defend us from bankers.

The CFPB got off to a rocky start, with challenges to the unique system of long-term leadership appointments meant to depoliticize the office, as well as the sudden resignation of its inaugural boss, who broke his promise to see his term through in order to launch an unsuccessful bid for political office.

But after the 2020 election, the Bureau came into its own, when Biden poached Rohit Chopra from the FTC and put him in charge. Chopra went on a tear, taking on landlords who violated the covid eviction moratorium:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/04/20/euthanize-rentier-enablers/#cfpb

Then banning payday lenders' scummiest tactics:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/01/29/planned-obsolescence/#academic-fraud

Then striking at one of fintech's most predatory grifts, the "earned wage access" hustle:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/05/01/usury/#tech-exceptionalism

Then closing the loophole that let credit reporting bureaus (like Equifax, who doxed every single American in a spectacular 2019 breach) avoid regulation by creating data brokerage divisions and claiming they weren't part of the regulated activity of credit reporting:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/08/16/the-second-best-time-is-now/#the-point-of-a-system-is-what-it-does

Chopra went on to promise to ban data-brokers altogether:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/13/goulash/#material-misstatement

Then he banned comparison shopping sites where you go to find the best bank accounts and credit cards from accepting bribes and putting more expensive options at the top of the list. Instead, he's requiring banks to send the CFPB regular, accurate lists of all their charges, and standing up a federal operated comparison shopping site that gives only accurate and honest rankings. Finally, he's made an interoperability rule requiring banks to let you transfer to another institution with one click, just like you change phone carriers. That means you can search an honest site to find the best deal on your banking, and then, with a single click, transfer your accounts, your account history, your payees, and all your other banking data to that new bank:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/10/21/let-my-dollars-go/#personal-financial-data-rights

Somewhere in there, big business got scared. They cooked up a legal theory declaring the CFPB's funding mechanism to be unconstitutional and got the case fast-tracked to the Supreme Court, in a bid to put Chopra and the CFPB permanently out of business. Instead, the Supremes – these Supremes! – upheld the CFPB's funding mechanism in a 7-2 ruling:

https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/05/supreme-court-lets-cfpb-funding-stand/

That ruling was a starter pistol for Chopra and the Bureau. Maybe it seemed like they were taking big swings before, but it turns out all that was just a warmup. Last week on The American Prospect, Robert Kuttner rounded up all the stuff the Bureau is kicking off:

https://prospect.org/blogs-and-newsletters/tap/2024-06-07-window-on-corporate-deceptions/

First: regulating Buy Now, Pay Later companies (think: Klarna) as credit-card companies, with all the requirements for disclosure and interest rate caps dictated by the Truth In Lending Act:

https://www.skadden.com/insights/publications/2024/06/cfpb-applies-credit-card-rules

Next: creating a registry of habitual corporate criminals. This rogues gallery will make it harder for other agencies – like the DOJ – and state Attorneys General to offer bullshit "delayed prosecution agreements" to companies that compulsively rip us off:

https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/cfpb-creates-registry-to-detect-corporate-repeat-offenders/

Then there's the rule against "fine print deception" – which is when the fine print in a contract lies to you about your rights, like when a mortgage lender forces you waive a right you can't actually waive, or car lenders that make you waive your bankruptcy rights, which, again, you can't waive:

https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/cfpb-warns-against-deception-in-contract-fine-print/

As Kuttner writes, the common thread running through all these orders is that they ban deceptive practices – they make it illegal for companies to steal from us by lying to us. Especially in these dying days of class action suits – rapidly becoming obsolete thanks to "mandatory arbitration waivers" that make you sign away your right to join a class action – agencies like the CFPB are our only hope of punishing companies that lie to us to steal from us.

There's a lot of bad stuff going on in the world right now, and much of it – including an active genocide – is coming from the Biden White House.

But there are people in the Biden Administration who care about the American people and who are effective and committed fighters who have our back. What's more, they're winning. That doesn't make all the bad news go away, but sometimes it feels good to take a moment and take the W.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/06/10/getting-things-done/#deliverism

[kiyawritesforf1]

BOWLED OVER AND BUSTED

Pairing : Oscar Piastri x Sharma!Reader

Rohit Sharma x Sister!Reader

Summary : Secrets, surprises, and a very dramatic big brother—what could possibly go wrong?

Your relationship with Oscar Piastri had started off unexpectedly, thanks to Pat Cummins. You had met at a casual dinner with Pat and a few other mutual friends in Melbourne. At first, you hadn’t thought much of Oscar—just another reserved but friendly guy. But when the two of you ended up seated next to each other, the conversation had flowed effortlessly.

“You’re really into cricket, huh?” Oscar had asked, watching as you passionately debated a point with Pat.

You had laughed. “It’s kind of a given when your brother is Rohit Sharma.”

That had piqued Oscar’s interest. “Wait, the Rohit Sharma?”

You had groaned. “Please don’t turn into a fanboy.”

He had smirked. “No promises.”

That night, the two of you had exchanged numbers, claiming it was “just to talk about sports.” But soon, sports became late-night conversations, coffee dates, and eventually, something much more.

Dating Oscar was easy. He understood your world, the pressure of being in the public eye, and the chaos of a busy schedule. He never made you feel like you had to choose between your own life and your relationship. But there was one tiny problem—Rohit.

You had no idea how to tell him. Your brother was fiercely protective, and you knew the moment he found out, the drama would be endless. So, you and Oscar had decided to keep things quiet—for now.

That plan had worked perfectly. Until today.

⸻

Oscar was in your kitchen, struggling to chop onions while you stirred a simmering curry on the stove.

“I think I’m crying,” he muttered, blinking rapidly.

You chuckled. “That’s what onions do.”

“This is worse than driving in the rain,” he grumbled, wiping his eyes.

Before you could tease him further, you heard the sound of your front door unlocking.

Your eyes widened in panic as you turned to Oscar. “Did you lock the door?”

“I thought you did,” he whispered back.

A second later, your worst fear came true.

“Y/N! What the hell is going on here?”

Your stomach dropped.

Standing at the doorway, arms crossed, was none other than Rohit Sharma. And behind him, looking equally amused and confused, was Virat Kohli.

Your sharp inhale was loud enough for Oscar to hear. “Oh no.”

“Oh yes,” Rohit said, stepping forward with his signature ‘big brother glare.’ “What is this?”

Virat, trying (and failing) to suppress a laugh, nudged Rohit. “I think we just walked in on something.”

Rohit’s gaze darted between you and Oscar, taking in the scene—the two of you in the kitchen, standing too close, too comfortable. Oscar, still holding the knife, froze like a deer in headlights.

Virat smirked. “Hey mate, you might want to put the knife down before Rohit actually loses it.”

Oscar, realizing the situation, immediately put the knife down and raised his hands in surrender. “Okay. Not the best first impression.”

Rohit’s expression twisted from confusion to disbelief. “Wait a second. Don’t tell me…” His eyes widened as he turned to you. “You’re dating him?!”

You winced. “Umm… surprise?”

Virat burst out laughing. “This just made my day.”

Rohit, on the other hand, was not laughing. “How long?”

You hesitated. “A few months?”

Wrong answer.

Rohit’s jaw dropped. “A few months?! And you didn’t tell me?”

“I was going to!” you defended. “I just… didn’t know how to bring it up.”

Oscar, trying to help, chimed in. “To be fair, I wanted to tell you—”

Rohit turned his glare on him. “You don’t get to speak right now.”

Oscar immediately shut his mouth.

Virat, still grinning, patted Rohit’s shoulder. “I mean, it could be worse. At least it’s not someone like Max Verstappen.”

Oscar frowned. “Hey—”

Rohit groaned, rubbing his temples. “This is unbelievable. Out of everyone, you chose him?”

Oscar raised an eyebrow. “What’s wrong with me?”

Rohit shot him a look. “I’ve seen you race, and you take way too many risks. And now you’re dating my sister?” He shook his head. “No. Not happening.”

You groaned. “Bhai, this isn’t your decision.”

He looked at you, his face softening slightly. “I just… I don’t want you to get hurt.”

“I won’t,” you assured him. “Oscar is good to me. And I’m happy.”

Virat nodded. “She’s got a point, Rohit. You can’t baby her forever.”

Rohit let out a long breath before looking back at Oscar. “If you ever hurt her—”

“I won’t,” Oscar interrupted quickly. “I promise.”

Virat leaned closer to Oscar and whispered, “Good answer.”

Rohit narrowed his eyes but sighed dramatically. “God, I need a drink.”

You smiled, stepping forward to hug him. “You’ll get used to it.”

He grumbled but hugged you back. “Not anytime soon.”

Oscar, feeling slightly more relaxed, offered a sheepish smile. “So… does this mean you sort of approve?”

Rohit shot him a look. “Don’t push your luck.”

Virat smirked. “I approve, if that helps.”

Rohit rolled his eyes. “You don’t count.”

Oscar sighed. “I’ll take what I can get.

[saywhat-politics]

The White House on Saturday fired the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Rohit Chopra — one of the final regulators held over from the Biden administration.

Why it matters: Trump is the first president to fire a leader of the CFPB. The Supreme Court in 2020 ruled the agency's structure was unconstitutional and said presidents could fire directors at will.

The future of the agency in the Trump era is up in the air. Chopra's term was not supposed to end until next year.

Catch up quick: Under Chopra, the consumer protection agency took aggressive action against banks, often putting him at odds with the financial industry.

Days before Trump took office last month, the CFPB sued Capital One for allegedly "cheating customers" out of billions in interest on consumer savings accounts.

Chopra cracked down on junk fees and signaled support for a proposal that would cap credit card interest rates, something Trump has openly supported.

[ek-ranjhaan]

Na final mein Pakistan hai, na Pakistan mein final hai.

[aahistaa]

ROHIT IS THE PLAYER OF THE MATCH, MY CAPTAIN 😭💗

[desi-yearning]

Ek dil. Ek jaan.

[dreamboatt]

And nobody is crying tonight yeahhhhhh.

2027 WC here we come🙇‍♂️🇮🇳

[andreainlove]

ppl spaming their blogs about dude as if all of them are Rohit's girlfriends

[zindagi-dard-hai]

Bhai you have to appreciate Rohit captaincy

We already played 2 ICC finals under his captaincy and now this is 3rd 😭

1) ICC WORLD CUP 2023 (FINALISTS)

2) ICC WORLD T20 2024 ( CHAMPIONS 🏆)

3) ICC CHAMPIONS TROPHY 2025(IN FINAL ALREADY!!!)

Man on his dream run 🫡🫡🫡

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Shifting $677m from the banks to the people, every year, forever

I'll be in TUCSON, AZ from November 8-10: I'm the GUEST OF HONOR at the TUSCON SCIENCE FICTION CONVENTION.

"Switching costs" are one of the great underappreciated evils in our world: the more it costs you to change from one product or service to another, the worse the vendor, provider, or service you're using today can treat you without risking your business.

Businesses set out to keep switching costs as high as possible. Literally. Mark Zuckerberg's capos send him memos chortling about how Facebook's new photos feature will punish anyone who leaves for a rival service with the loss of all their family photos – meaning Zuck can torment those users for profit and they'll still stick around so long as the abuse is less bad than the loss of all their cherished memories:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/08/facebooks-secret-war-switching-costs

It's often hard to quantify switching costs. We can tell when they're high, say, if your landlord ties your internet service to your lease (splitting the profits with a shitty ISP that overcharges and underdelivers), the switching cost of getting a new internet provider is the cost of moving house. We can tell when they're low, too: you can switch from one podcatcher program to another just by exporting your list of subscriptions from the old one and importing it into the new one:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/10/16/keep-it-really-simple-stupid/#read-receipts-are-you-kidding-me-seriously-fuck-that-noise

But sometimes, economists can get a rough idea of the dollar value of high switching costs. For example, a group of economists working for the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau calculated that the hassle of changing banks is costing Americans at least $677m per year (see page 526):

https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/cfpb_personal-financial-data-rights-final-rule_2024-10.pdf

The CFPB economists used a very conservative methodology, so the number is likely higher, but let's stick with that figure for now. The switching costs of changing banks – determining which bank has the best deal for you, then transfering over your account histories, cards, payees, and automated bill payments – are costing everyday Americans more than half a billion dollars, every year.

Now, the CFPB wasn't gathering this data just to make you mad. They wanted to do something about all this money – to find a way to lower switching costs, and, in so doing, transfer all that money from bank shareholders and executives to the American public.

And that's just what they did. A newly finalized Personal Financial Data Rights rule will allow you to authorize third parties – other banks, comparison shopping sites, brokers, anyone who offers you a better deal, or help you find one – to request your account data from your bank. Your bank will be required to provide that data.

I loved this rule when they first proposed it:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/06/10/getting-things-done/#deliverism

And I like the final rule even better. They've really nailed this one, even down to the fine-grained details where interop wonks like me get very deep into the weeds. For example, a thorny problem with interop rules like this one is "who gets to decide how the interoperability works?" Where will the data-formats come from? How will we know they're fit for purpose?

This is a super-hard problem. If we put the monopolies whose power we're trying to undermine in charge of this, they can easily cheat by delivering data in uselessly obfuscated formats. For example, when I used California's privacy law to force Mailchimp to provide list of all the mailing lists I've been signed up for without my permission, they sent me thousands of folders containing more than 5,900 spreadsheets listing their internal serial numbers for the lists I'm on, with no way to find out what these lists are called or how to get off of them:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/07/22/degoogled/#kafka-as-a-service

So if we're not going to let the companies decide on data formats, who should be in charge of this? One possibility is to require the use of a standard, but again, which standard? We can ask a standards body to make a new standard, which they're often very good at, but not when the stakes are high like this. Standards bodies are very weak institutions that large companies are very good at capturing:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/04/30/weak-institutions/

Here's how the CFPB solved this: they listed out the characteristics of a good standards body, listed out the data types that the standard would have to encompass, and then told banks that so long as they used a standard from a good standards body that covered all the data-types, they'd be in the clear.

Once the rule is in effect, you'll be able to go to a comparison shopping site and authorize it to go to your bank for your transaction history, and then tell you which bank – out of all the banks in America – will pay you the most for your deposits and charge you the least for your debts. Then, after you open a new account, you can authorize the new bank to go back to your old bank and get all your data: payees, scheduled payments, payment history, all of it. Switching banks will be as easy as switching mobile phone carriers – just a few clicks and a few minutes' work to get your old number working on a phone with a new provider.

This will save Americans at least $677 million, every year. Which is to say, it will cost the banks at least $670 million every year.

Naturally, America's largest banks are suing to block the rule:

https://www.americanbanker.com/news/cfpbs-open-banking-rule-faces-suit-from-bank-policy-institute

Of course, the banks claim that they're only suing to protect you, and the $677m annual transfer from their investors to the public has nothing to do with it. The banks claim to be worried about bank-fraud, which is a real thing that we should be worried about. They say that an interoperability rule could make it easier for scammers to get at your data and even transfer your account to a sleazy fly-by-night operation without your consent. This is also true!

It is obviously true that a bad interop rule would be bad. But it doesn't follow that every interop rule is bad, or that it's impossible to make a good one. The CFPB has made a very good one.

For starters, you can't just authorize anyone to get your data. Eligible third parties have to meet stringent criteria and vetting. These third parties are only allowed to ask for the narrowest slice of your data needed to perform the task you've set for them. They aren't allowed to use that data for anything else, and as soon as they've finished, they must delete your data. You can also revoke their access to your data at any time, for any reason, with one click – none of this "call a customer service rep and wait on hold" nonsense.

What's more, if your bank has any doubts about a request for your data, they are empowered to (temporarily) refuse to provide it, until they confirm with you that everything is on the up-and-up.

I wrote about the lawsuit this week for @eff@mastodon.social's Deeplinks blog:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/10/no-matter-what-bank-says-its-your-money-your-data-and-your-choice

In that article, I point out the tedious, obvious ruses of securitywashing and privacywashing, where a company insists that its most abusive, exploitative, invasive conduct can't be challenged because that would expose their customers to security and privacy risks. This is such bullshit.

It's bullshit when printer companies say they can't let you use third party ink – for your own good:

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/01/hp-ceo-blocking-third-party-ink-from-printers-fights-viruses/

It's bullshit when car companies say they can't let you use third party mechanics – for your own good:

https://pluralistic.net/2020/09/03/rip-david-graeber/#rolling-surveillance-platforms

It's bullshit when Apple says they can't let you use third party app stores – for your own good:

https://www.eff.org/document/letter-bruce-schneier-senate-judiciary-regarding-app-store-security

It's bullshit when Facebook says you can't independently monitor the paid disinformation in your feed – for your own good:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/08/05/comprehensive-sex-ed/#quis-custodiet-ipsos-zuck

And it's bullshit when the banks say you can't change to a bank that charges you less, and pays you more – for your own good.

CFPB boss Rohit Chopra is part of a cohort of Biden enforcers who've hit upon a devastatingly effective tactic for fighting corporate power: they read the law and found out what they're allowed to do, and then did it:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/10/23/getting-stuff-done/#praxis

The CFPB was created in 2010 with the passage of the Consumer Financial Protection Act, which specifically empowers the CFPB to make this kind of data-sharing rule. Back when the CFPA was in Congress, the banks howled about this rule, whining that they were being forced to share their data with their competitors.

But your account data isn't your bank's data. It's your data. And the CFPB is gonna let you have it, and they're gonna save you and your fellow Americans at least $677m/year – forever.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/11/01/bankshot/#personal-financial-data-rights

[08cjvvman1]

[peachpaloma]

rohit mane

[saywhat-politics]

Rohit Krishnan has spent years watching how Silicon Valley leaders build companies and take them apart. Now he has a warning for D.C.

Washington has been blown away by the speed with which Elon Musk and his team of engineers have swept across the executive branch — using the seemingly limited mandate of the new DOGE office to trigger mass layoffs, wipe out entire federal programs and strike fear into the employees of one of the world’s largest and most stable bureaucracies.

But what, really, does Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency want?

[janesurlife]

Weirdest combination ever 🤣🤣🤣🤣

none of you will get this but it's fine.