I pop in here to the comment section, and read a bunch of people angrily talking about how there really not being an job opening problem, just that "employers are full of shit".
Here's the thing. That's what the article says. Let me be helpful to you, and quote it:
Part of the hiring problem, Chamberlain says, lies in company hiring policies.
Peter Cappelli, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School, agrees. He says one problem is that companies are posting openings with required qualifications that aren't really necessary for the job.
"They're just asking for the moon, and not expecting to pay very much for it," Cappelli says. "And as a result they [can't] find those people. Now that [doesn't] mean there was nobody to do the job; it just [means] that there was nobody at the price they were willing to pay."
We have a winner. I don't give a damn about any stupid GPS spoofing, you don't run ships into each other unless the crew is so absurdly tired that they're literally sleeping on watch.
This is well known, and a cultural issue through all the services, especially more recently. It has nothing to do with funding or politics or any other bullshit.
Voters receive their paper ballots about a month in advance. They can either fill it out and put it in the mail, or wait until the last minute and drop it off at any library or county clerk's office (think traffic court). All ballots must be in an envelope signed by the voter or it doesn't count. The county registrar has people trained to check signatures as they come in. If there is a mismatch, they contact the voter when there is time (sometimes older people, or those who have health issues, have shakier handwriting), and the voter can come down to straighten it out.
The ballots are then put in bins, which are then tabulated (for cost efficiency) by high speed vote counting machines on election night. The machines are certified, tested with special ballot runs to make sure they're working correctly, and are not hooked up to the internet. And to the best of my understanding, don't even have any external interfaces.
The paper ballots are never thrown away, in case there is a challenge. If the vote is very close, a recount is done automatically by hand. If not, the losing side can pay to have the recount done. All these processes are open to the public and are typically overseen by everyone from the most kook teabagger to the greenest of pretending-not-to-be-communist green.
About eight years ago, on a special election night in Tillamook, there was a terrible winter storm. The main highway was quite literally flooded by 5 feet of water. Despite this, there was an over 80% turnout. Everyone had mailed in their ballots long before.
Democrats love the system. Rural Republicans especially love the system. It's secure. Almost impossible to pull dirty tricks with. Basically impossible to hack. And best of all - cheap. Seriously. Because it reuses the US post system and libraries, there is no need to organize election stations, monitors, volunteers, reserve space for people to vote. It's nearly half the cost of all other systems.
Increased nitrate runoff means that the waterways get choked with nitrates and algae growing so fast that it created an anaerobic environment when it dies. This is the reverse of what you were thinking it said.
It isn't "Congress" which is trying this, it's a small group of the minority party. In fact, a small group even of the minority party. Basically nothing but gesture politics.
Why is this being covered as if it's real, again?
The only plausible answer is that it's BS click-bait.
What is sad about the US in general, and Slashdot specifically, is that the comments here about the actual data and the failures in this correlative model, are basically left alone, while all the racist "See even them super smart computers know nig... sorry... blacks are ebil crooks" shitposts, get to +5 almost immediately.
Slashdot needs a new slogan: Validation of biases. No intelligence found here.
In sum, of 258 endpoints, 238—92 percent—showed no effects. (Four endpoints didn’t yield data.) Only 16 showed effects. Negative effects showed up 9 times—3.5 percent of all outcomes; 7 showed a benefit from using neonics—2.7 percent.
As one scientist pointed out, in statistics there is a widely accepted standard that random results are generated about 5 percent of the time—which means by chance alone we would expect 13 results meaninglessly showing up positive or negative.
You might as well publish a story that said. "Scientists prove that a casino die rolled 16 times came up a 4, 5, or 6, nine whole times. So dice are clearly all weighted to roll high. This is patently stupid.
Maybe neonicotinoids do kill bees, but this study sure doesn't show it. And whatever the effect is, it's pretty small.
It was the Republicans and the Dems BOTH who shot down Hillary's Single Payer Health Care Bill
Wasting time introducing internet kooks to facts is an endless wast of time, but just FYI, "Hillary-care" as it was called, was not exactly single payer. That is part of the reason why the Sanders wing of the Democratic party wasn't all that enchanted with her in 2016.
It did have the vast majority of Democrats behind it, and Republicans were absolutely terrified that it would prove to the public that the government can solve problems that private markets can't find profit in solving.
The long-term political effects of a successful... health care bill will be even worse—much worse.... It will revive the reputation of... Democrats as the generous protector of middle-class interests. And it will at the same time strike a punishing blow against Republican claims to defend the middle class by restraining government.
—William Kristol, "Defeating President Clinton's Healthcare Proposal", December 1993
According to this overview of unmanned aircraft law, drone use is largely being regulated by the states. Aside from the FAA's widely anticipated and vetted operational rules, there really isn't much more that can be done at the Federal level. The FAA can add restrictions to operators. It cannot prevent states from putting on additional reasonable restrictions, which many have.
So I'm not exactly sure what Trump imagines he is going to do to "help" these companies.
But I'm sure he will. After all, it's not like he already has a reputation for making grandiose promises that he has no intention of keeping, or bullshitting about things he is laughably ignorant about. Nope. Never seen that happen.
Reading the article, it's all people with an interest in peddling solutions to the problem, naturally. This is a marketing paper.
Claiming that Software Engineers have "failed" at security is akin to claiming that police have "failed" at crime stopping crime. And the courts aren't going to suddenly start blaming companies for the actions of threat actors unless there is some representation that the products they're creating are unhackable.
I have one. If the situation were reversed - Trump won the popular vote by 3 million, but lost due to the Electoral Collage, there would be literally thousands of right wing kooks literally trying to murder a Madame President Clinton. No one outside of die-hard Clinton supporters would consider her to have any right to assume the duties of office. Trump would be screaming about "Second Amendment solutions" like he did before the election. And if Clinton had been discovered doing even half of all the corrupt bullshit Trump has been caught doing, she would have been impeached already.
Both sides hypocritically switched positions on a dime when the current turn of events came up, but the sheer depth of hypocrisy of Republicans keeps managing to astound me, no matter how low my expectations get. I'm waiting for them to start waving the flag of the old defunct USSR, because the Democrats were against that country when it existed.
Allen's Stratolaunch will provide the first 3% of that speed. Compared to a traditional 10 ton rocket to place 1 ton in LEO, there would be a savings of 0.25 tons of rocket fuel. Since Stratolaunch is designed to launch three rockets per trip, there are considerable savings in preparation and maintenance costs. And of course jet fuel is much less expensive than rocket fuel, especially when you consider the special handling rocket fuels require.
Air launch to orbit make a lot of sense.
It actually makes even more sense than that, because fuel burn to acceleration it's not linear. Getting a rocket from 0 to 100 MPH takes up a massively disproportionate amount of fuel, because not only does your thrust have to accelerate the rocket, it also has to accelerate the rest of the fuel and the container for that fuel that you're about to burn as well. I would have to check the numbers to get an exact estimate, but it almost certainly could shave at least a ton of fuel and more likely two tons. The rocket doesn't have to be quite as sturdy in terms of resisting aerodynamic pressure as well, given that you're taking off about about 80% of the atmosphere.
. (As an additional "fun" fact, any trip to a "super earth" with a diameter 50% greater than our earth would be literally impossible to leave, at least with chemical propellants.)
Well, I didn't see anything about energy density, which is the main problem with flow batteries. They're lower than Lithium-ion.
Furthermore, membrane-less flow batteries already exist. The problem is that they rely on laminar flow, which is basically impossible to maintain under any sort of acceleration. So, no. Can't use them in cars.
The problem with the USA is that it now eats too much of its own dog food.
Societal pressure to have students do well in tests in small monolithic cultures, like South Korea and Finland, do not necessarily translate perfectly into larger societies. The American educational system is actually praised across much of Asia, because it focuses more on creativity rather than regurgitation. Slower students do tend to find it easier to drop out of US schools, but as compensation, the best students usually find unique opportunities that allow them to excel in ways that Asian countries don't usually allow.
China is never going to have the world's biggest economy until it ditches its totalitarian system. There is just too much you cannot do.
To expand his real estate developments over the years, Donald Trump, his company and partners repeatedly turned to wealthy Russians and oligarchs from former Soviet republics — several allegedly connected to organized crime, according to a USA TODAY review of court cases, government and legal documents and an interview with a former federal prosecutor.
The president and his companies have been linked to at least 10 wealthy former Soviet businessmen with alleged ties to criminal organizations or money laundering.
Among them:
A member of the firm that developed the Trump SoHo Hotel in New York is a twice-convicted felon who spent a year in prison for stabbing a man and later scouted for Trump investments in Russia.
An investor in the SoHo project was accused by Belgian authorities in 2011 in a $55 million money-laundering scheme.
Three owners of Trump condos in Florida and Manhattan were accused in federal indictments of belonging to a Russian-American organized crime group and working for a major international crime boss based in Russia.
A former mayor from Kazakhstan was accused in a federal lawsuit filed in Los Angeles in 2014 of hiding millions of dollars looted from his city, some of which was spent on three Trump SoHo units.
A Ukrainian owner of two Trump condos in Florida was indicted in a money-laundering scheme involving a former prime minister of Ukraine.
Thank you for that source. I read it, and it provides some very interesting facts about the murky nature of the FBI, and how that organization has been used for, what I will characterize as, political malfeasance. However, I don't agree with the author's belief that "The FBI isn't even legal". I'm pretty sure if it were, the courts, Congress, and the President would have taken note of it by now.
To clarify my comments above, let me state the following:
Trump is irrefutably up to his eyeballs in debt to Putin connected billionaires.
This may be embarrassing but is by no means illegal.
The only question is the emoluments clause of the Constitution and the suddenly discovered issue of how it is to be enforced, and by whom. The Supreme Court? Congress? And what is the standard applied? Would a future president who had a credit card drawn on a non-American bank qualify?
These sorts of issues are never even discussed dispassionately, because people just want the media to tell them how good they are compared to other Americans.
The worse aspect of this is the ability for "validation news" to simply pretend that large scale known facts don't exist. This means you don't even have to talk around or justify facts that don't support your world view. You can just live in a media ecosystem in which they don't exist.
While this isn't new, technology has made this tendency dramatically worse. If you won't pander to someone who is looking for fake news, someone else will. There is no more news. Only "infortainment". Edward R. Murrow must be rolling over in his grave.
You can't use lefty rags as sources when even they say that there is no hard evidence. Only to follow up with STFU. Can you see the irony there?
The only irony here is your attempt to refute my observation that too many people only want validation, by showing that you reject anything other than what you want to believe, and not even addressing the many referenced sources and facts that were presented to do.
That so many people are like you pretend that facts presented in mainstream publications are false because of some imaginary bias you impute to them (because they provide facts, rather than validation), is the problem.
By the way, the etymology behind the word "rags" is that kook-conspiracy-theorists (both kook left and kook right) back in the day didn't have the money to pay for decent publication values, and so hard to print their stuff on cheap paper that quickly became yellowed and ragged. These days, thanks to the internet, people posting unsourced drivel and made-up bullshit "news," have the ability to make things look much more presentable at least in terms of formatting, so it isn't as obvious which is a multiply sourced story with Pulitzer winning investigative reporters, and which is some kook typing out blue lies in his basement. In short, whatever you think to yourself isn't biased would have been, 40 years ago, a literal "rag".
This is really a story about how increased competition and choice in the marketplace has made the overall product (in this case - news) worse, not better. That is very atypical for free trade.
That's not a war on America. That's what America wants.
Media outlets live and die by ratings. They've tried appealing to people's logic before. Audiences tune it out.
Actually, this is a general metaphor for most of the modern world. Big bad "corporations" get blamed for the general preferences and assholishness of the general public. Want to know why all food is such cheap shit? McDs tries to sell salads, but nobody buys. Want to know why all the characters in horror movies are so stupid, and hit TV shows make fun of nerds? Most of the audience is stupider than a bag of rocks.
And politically -- and this also applies to intelligent people as well -- nobody wants information. All they want is validation. So that's what modern day media provides them. They have to, in this competitive landscape. The days of the big three forcing people to watch southerners brutalizing blacks because there was literally nothing else on TV, is long gone. They'll just switch to FOX, where no one even knows that Trump is in hock up to his eyeballs to Putin-connected billionaires.
... much like the stimulus plan of 2008 that Sherriff Joe was supposed to keep track of every dollar.....
The stimulus plan was mostly targeted tax breaks, except for direct bailouts that were given to auto companies and a few major banks (those who had been pressured by the Bush administration to buy toxic assets, thereby jeopardizing their own solvency). Of that latter, every single penny was paid back to the US taxpayer, with interest, and actually made a tidy profit.
So if you're trying to compare "that Obama Care website" (there were actually dozens, and still are) to the 2008 stimulus plan, you're saying something completely different than you think you are.
Honestly, you sound like you fully drank the Alex Jones/Rush Limbaugh kool-aid, given how non-specific and fact-free your attack is. Try again when you don't sound like an equally clueless anti-free-trade leftist.
Holy shit, the lack of self-awareness is strong in you.
The OP used the term "little white male snowflakes" ironically to make the point that the people who scream loudest about snowflakes are doing nothing more than projecting their own fragility.
And since you are so profoundly unaware, that's you buttercup.
Bingo
But the one thing I've learned when dealing with snowflakes of any color - but especially the white male ones - is that they only scream harder that they're the TRUE victim, while using every tool at their disposal to try to silence anyone who calls them out, when you tell them to quit their bullshit.
So I take my "Troll" rating by the special snowflakes with pride. The poor things thought slashdot was their echo chamber safe space.
Slashdot Mirror
I pop in here to the comment section, and read a bunch of people angrily talking about how there really not being an job opening problem, just that "employers are full of shit".
Here's the thing. That's what the article says. Let me be helpful to you, and quote it:
Part of the hiring problem, Chamberlain says, lies in company hiring policies.
Peter Cappelli, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School, agrees. He says one problem is that companies are posting openings with required qualifications that aren't really necessary for the job.
"They're just asking for the moon, and not expecting to pay very much for it," Cappelli says. "And as a result they [can't] find those people. Now that [doesn't] mean there was nobody to do the job; it just [means] that there was nobody at the price they were willing to pay."
Come on people! Read!
Ding! Ding! Ding!
We have a winner. I don't give a damn about any stupid GPS spoofing, you don't run ships into each other unless the crew is so absurdly tired that they're literally sleeping on watch.
This is well known, and a cultural issue through all the services, especially more recently. It has nothing to do with funding or politics or any other bullshit.
...and I have to shut up and not say that women cops are worse at their jobs than male cops...
And I'm being paid a google engineer's salary in exchange for this imposition on my constitutional right on my free speech....
I shall happily comply.
Voters receive their paper ballots about a month in advance. They can either fill it out and put it in the mail, or wait until the last minute and drop it off at any library or county clerk's office (think traffic court). All ballots must be in an envelope signed by the voter or it doesn't count. The county registrar has people trained to check signatures as they come in. If there is a mismatch, they contact the voter when there is time (sometimes older people, or those who have health issues, have shakier handwriting), and the voter can come down to straighten it out.
The ballots are then put in bins, which are then tabulated (for cost efficiency) by high speed vote counting machines on election night. The machines are certified, tested with special ballot runs to make sure they're working correctly, and are not hooked up to the internet. And to the best of my understanding, don't even have any external interfaces.
The paper ballots are never thrown away, in case there is a challenge. If the vote is very close, a recount is done automatically by hand. If not, the losing side can pay to have the recount done. All these processes are open to the public and are typically overseen by everyone from the most kook teabagger to the greenest of pretending-not-to-be-communist green.
About eight years ago, on a special election night in Tillamook, there was a terrible winter storm. The main highway was quite literally flooded by 5 feet of water. Despite this, there was an over 80% turnout. Everyone had mailed in their ballots long before.
Democrats love the system. Rural Republicans especially love the system. It's secure. Almost impossible to pull dirty tricks with. Basically impossible to hack. And best of all - cheap. Seriously. Because it reuses the US post system and libraries, there is no need to organize election stations, monitors, volunteers, reserve space for people to vote. It's nearly half the cost of all other systems.
Increased nitrate runoff means that the waterways get choked with nitrates and algae growing so fast that it created an anaerobic environment when it dies. This is the reverse of what you were thinking it said.
I suspect it's more the writer and the proofreader. National Geographic isn't exactly Scientific American.
It isn't "Congress" which is trying this, it's a small group of the minority party. In fact, a small group even of the minority party. Basically nothing but gesture politics.
Why is this being covered as if it's real, again?
The only plausible answer is that it's BS click-bait.
What is sad about the US in general, and Slashdot specifically, is that the comments here about the actual data and the failures in this correlative model, are basically left alone, while all the racist "See even them super smart computers know nig... sorry... blacks are ebil crooks" shitposts, get to +5 almost immediately.
Slashdot needs a new slogan: Validation of biases. No intelligence found here.
In sum, of 258 endpoints, 238—92 percent—showed no effects. (Four endpoints didn’t yield data.) Only 16 showed effects. Negative effects showed up 9 times—3.5 percent of all outcomes; 7 showed a benefit from using neonics—2.7 percent.
As one scientist pointed out, in statistics there is a widely accepted standard that random results are generated about 5 percent of the time—which means by chance alone we would expect 13 results meaninglessly showing up positive or negative.
You might as well publish a story that said. "Scientists prove that a casino die rolled 16 times came up a 4, 5, or 6, nine whole times. So dice are clearly all weighted to roll high. This is patently stupid.
Maybe neonicotinoids do kill bees, but this study sure doesn't show it. And whatever the effect is, it's pretty small.
Wasting time introducing internet kooks to facts is an endless wast of time, but just FYI, "Hillary-care" as it was called, was not exactly single payer. That is part of the reason why the Sanders wing of the Democratic party wasn't all that enchanted with her in 2016.
It did have the vast majority of Democrats behind it, and Republicans were absolutely terrified that it would prove to the public that the government can solve problems that private markets can't find profit in solving.
According to this overview of unmanned aircraft law, drone use is largely being regulated by the states. Aside from the FAA's widely anticipated and vetted operational rules, there really isn't much more that can be done at the Federal level. The FAA can add restrictions to operators. It cannot prevent states from putting on additional reasonable restrictions, which many have.
So I'm not exactly sure what Trump imagines he is going to do to "help" these companies.
But I'm sure he will. After all, it's not like he already has a reputation for making grandiose promises that he has no intention of keeping, or bullshitting about things he is laughably ignorant about. Nope. Never seen that happen.
Reading the article, it's all people with an interest in peddling solutions to the problem, naturally. This is a marketing paper.
Claiming that Software Engineers have "failed" at security is akin to claiming that police have "failed" at crime stopping crime. And the courts aren't going to suddenly start blaming companies for the actions of threat actors unless there is some representation that the products they're creating are unhackable.
I have one. If the situation were reversed - Trump won the popular vote by 3 million, but lost due to the Electoral Collage, there would be literally thousands of right wing kooks literally trying to murder a Madame President Clinton. No one outside of die-hard Clinton supporters would consider her to have any right to assume the duties of office. Trump would be screaming about "Second Amendment solutions" like he did before the election. And if Clinton had been discovered doing even half of all the corrupt bullshit Trump has been caught doing, she would have been impeached already.
Both sides hypocritically switched positions on a dime when the current turn of events came up, but the sheer depth of hypocrisy of Republicans keeps managing to astound me, no matter how low my expectations get. I'm waiting for them to start waving the flag of the old defunct USSR, because the Democrats were against that country when it existed.
You missed one:
This has already been discussed rather extensively.
...to be able to install my own firmware on a router that is on a secure network, then I can access the data on the secure network it is attached to?
I would imagine if you could do all of that that, and be nearby at the time as well, then you could access the secure network by other means.
And all that assumes that data going across the secure network isn't all encrypted, which it typically is.
Allen's Stratolaunch will provide the first 3% of that speed. Compared to a traditional 10 ton rocket to place 1 ton in LEO, there would be a savings of 0.25 tons of rocket fuel. Since Stratolaunch is designed to launch three rockets per trip, there are considerable savings in preparation and maintenance costs. And of course jet fuel is much less expensive than rocket fuel, especially when you consider the special handling rocket fuels require. Air launch to orbit make a lot of sense.
It actually makes even more sense than that, because fuel burn to acceleration it's not linear. Getting a rocket from 0 to 100 MPH takes up a massively disproportionate amount of fuel, because not only does your thrust have to accelerate the rocket, it also has to accelerate the rest of the fuel and the container for that fuel that you're about to burn as well. I would have to check the numbers to get an exact estimate, but it almost certainly could shave at least a ton of fuel and more likely two tons. The rocket doesn't have to be quite as sturdy in terms of resisting aerodynamic pressure as well, given that you're taking off about about 80% of the atmosphere.
This is all described in the Rocket equation
. (As an additional "fun" fact, any trip to a "super earth" with a diameter 50% greater than our earth would be literally impossible to leave, at least with chemical propellants.)
Well, I didn't see anything about energy density, which is the main problem with flow batteries. They're lower than Lithium-ion.
Furthermore, membrane-less flow batteries already exist. The problem is that they rely on laminar flow, which is basically impossible to maintain under any sort of acceleration. So, no. Can't use them in cars.
I call this a meaningless hype article
The problem with the USA is that it now eats too much of its own dog food.
Societal pressure to have students do well in tests in small monolithic cultures, like South Korea and Finland, do not necessarily translate perfectly into larger societies. The American educational system is actually praised across much of Asia, because it focuses more on creativity rather than regurgitation. Slower students do tend to find it easier to drop out of US schools, but as compensation, the best students usually find unique opportunities that allow them to excel in ways that Asian countries don't usually allow.
China is never going to have the world's biggest economy until it ditches its totalitarian system. There is just too much you cannot do.
I'm not exactly sure what would possibly satisfy you. Is USA Today sufficiently mainstream? Trump's business network reached alleged Russian mobsters.
While we are at that, would suggest you having a look at commentaries on Russia affairs by Mark Ames, which are more on the information side I believe.
Thank you for that source. I read it, and it provides some very interesting facts about the murky nature of the FBI, and how that organization has been used for, what I will characterize as, political malfeasance. However, I don't agree with the author's belief that "The FBI isn't even legal". I'm pretty sure if it were, the courts, Congress, and the President would have taken note of it by now.
To clarify my comments above, let me state the following:
You can't use lefty rags as sources when even they say that there is no hard evidence. Only to follow up with STFU. Can you see the irony there?
The only irony here is your attempt to refute my observation that too many people only want validation, by showing that you reject anything other than what you want to believe, and not even addressing the many referenced sources and facts that were presented to do.
That so many people are like you pretend that facts presented in mainstream publications are false because of some imaginary bias you impute to them (because they provide facts, rather than validation), is the problem.
By the way, the etymology behind the word "rags" is that kook-conspiracy-theorists (both kook left and kook right) back in the day didn't have the money to pay for decent publication values, and so hard to print their stuff on cheap paper that quickly became yellowed and ragged. These days, thanks to the internet, people posting unsourced drivel and made-up bullshit "news," have the ability to make things look much more presentable at least in terms of formatting, so it isn't as obvious which is a multiply sourced story with Pulitzer winning investigative reporters, and which is some kook typing out blue lies in his basement. In short, whatever you think to yourself isn't biased would have been, 40 years ago, a literal "rag".
This is really a story about how increased competition and choice in the marketplace has made the overall product (in this case - news) worse, not better. That is very atypical for free trade.
That's not a war on America. That's what America wants.
Media outlets live and die by ratings. They've tried appealing to people's logic before. Audiences tune it out.
Actually, this is a general metaphor for most of the modern world. Big bad "corporations" get blamed for the general preferences and assholishness of the general public. Want to know why all food is such cheap shit? McDs tries to sell salads, but nobody buys. Want to know why all the characters in horror movies are so stupid, and hit TV shows make fun of nerds? Most of the audience is stupider than a bag of rocks.
And politically -- and this also applies to intelligent people as well -- nobody wants information. All they want is validation. So that's what modern day media provides them. They have to, in this competitive landscape. The days of the big three forcing people to watch southerners brutalizing blacks because there was literally nothing else on TV, is long gone. They'll just switch to FOX, where no one even knows that Trump is in hock up to his eyeballs to Putin-connected billionaires.
The stimulus plan was mostly targeted tax breaks, except for direct bailouts that were given to auto companies and a few major banks (those who had been pressured by the Bush administration to buy toxic assets, thereby jeopardizing their own solvency). Of that latter, every single penny was paid back to the US taxpayer, with interest, and actually made a tidy profit.
So if you're trying to compare "that Obama Care website" (there were actually dozens, and still are) to the 2008 stimulus plan, you're saying something completely different than you think you are.
Honestly, you sound like you fully drank the Alex Jones/Rush Limbaugh kool-aid, given how non-specific and fact-free your attack is. Try again when you don't sound like an equally clueless anti-free-trade leftist.
Then Chris Vickery not only will be able to defend himself, but may be able to countersue under New Jersey's anti-SLAPP laws (SLAPP = Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation - exactly what this suit seems to be). The penalties can be quite substantial, $280K in a recent case. Not only that, but there is another New Jersey law that allows a judge to dismiss a case with prejudice within 45 days of the SLAPP filing. This is all cogent, because RCM is a New Jersey corporation.
Furthermore, there is a shareholder group engaged in a proxy battle right now, saying that they see this as a desperate attempt to distract shareholders from corporate mismanagement. So this may not even get filed, depending on how the existing shareholders see this action>
Holy shit, the lack of self-awareness is strong in you.
The OP used the term "little white male snowflakes" ironically to make the point that the people who scream loudest about snowflakes are doing nothing more than projecting their own fragility.
And since you are so profoundly unaware, that's you buttercup.
Bingo
But the one thing I've learned when dealing with snowflakes of any color - but especially the white male ones - is that they only scream harder that they're the TRUE victim, while using every tool at their disposal to try to silence anyone who calls them out, when you tell them to quit their bullshit.
So I take my "Troll" rating by the special snowflakes with pride. The poor things thought slashdot was their echo chamber safe space.