Employers post jobs without posting salary ranges, then ask applicants their current/previous/desired salary. They do this to depress wages wherever possible.
The change makes them post salary ranges and prevents them asking about prior salary.
The law just closes loopholes in the existing regulations for fair hiring practices, such as making lower offers based on age, sex, race, etc.
Everyone at the top (CXO, board members, top paid employees based on cash plus stock options plus etc.) serves 1 day in prison for every instance of leaked info. Chase it down through subsidiaries, contractors, shell corporations, spouses, etc.
The other option is mob justice. (Which is fine by me.)
Why do businesses seldomly take option 2 (build it ourselves) and make it a standalone product the way id Software does with their game engines?
Because when it breaks or someone hacks it, you can't point the finger at an outside entity. Also because of the guarantee that someone in the room will utter the phrase "reinventing the wheel".
The standard "cupcake with frosting" image includes pink frosting. Chocolate frosting is far more common in real life, but that ends up looking like poop when used in any sort of graphical sense.
White frosting is usually taken to mean vanilla, and vanilla is synonymous with "boring". Green and blue are unappetizing colors for food. Strong red (such as frosting) looks like blood and is a hard color to get consistent (be it across print, web, etc., and don't you dare try to JPEG anything with large solid blocks of red). Yellow has the piss likeness if it's too strong, and looks weak and lame if it's too weak. Orange? Only for Halloween. (All colors are valid for their respective holidays.)
Pink frosting is the default because it's "fun", doesn't look like a bodily secretion, doesn't look like rotten food, etc. Go ahead, use your favorite search engine to look up images of real life cupcakes, then look up drawings / clip art / cartoon / etc. cupcakes. Notice the huge spike in representation of pink frosting.
We need to do X. How can we do X and how much will it cost?
We could buy A, it's costs $$$$$ to start / set up and ????? every year after. It'll do 80% of what we need and it says "secure" on the product page.
We could build it ourself. It'll take ??? months to do it, with a team of ?? people, and it'll do what we want and we'll be able to incorporate any changes needed later. It'll be unpolished, unreliable, and deployed too soon, but we'll add maintaining it to an existing employee's duties at no additional cost to us. Oh, other operating costs will be 0 because we'll tell the other department they have to run it since they run the current somewhat-related system that this will never fully replace.
There's this open source thing that does a piece of what we need. We can wrap some crap around that and shit it out the door next month and never touch it again until it all falls apart.
USB C is proprietary. It's not open or free. It's just popular. USB C is also crap. Cables that look identical but do different things, ports that look identical but do different things, chipsets that are invisible to users and advertised as "USB C" but do different things, cables that are often unsafe, devices (chargers) that are often unsafe, etc. But it's reversible this time!
It also assumes you CAN disable access on everything the person has access to.
There's plenty of gear, often at the critical infrastructure level (be it network, power, building monitoring, fire suppression, alarm systems, etc.) that would need a manual touch to change out the lowest level password. Not everything integrates into AD or some management portal, and even the stuff that does usually has a lower-level mode of access.
I think that film criticism is, over all, better than ever, because, with its new Internet-centrism, it's more democratic than ever
Being democratic doesn't make something good or correct. In fact, it often has the opposite effect. The vast majority of people are not experts in every field. In fact, the majority of people have less than average aptitude in any specific field. Making film criticism, or anything else that benefits from specific knowledge or experience, more "democratic" makes it objectively worse.
That said, Scorsese is correct. But he's only speaking out because the internet has allowed people who don't suck the anuses of Hollywood elites to voice their opinion. People and the internet absolutely should be hostile and critical of Hollywood and its products. Everything is fucking shit and has been for a while, yet they want to charge more, cater films to Chinese audiences, squeeze out the theaters showing their films, sue everyone for piracy of works that should be in the public domain or that they already own but can't use on a certain device, etc..
Nope, sorry. Hillary has done plenty of illegal and legal, but unethical and unfair, shit. No one would give half of a Hershey Squirt about some foreigners trolling online or buying ads online.
Slashdot Mirror
U R DUM.
Employers post jobs without posting salary ranges, then ask applicants their current/previous/desired salary.
They do this to depress wages wherever possible.
The change makes them post salary ranges and prevents them asking about prior salary.
The law just closes loopholes in the existing regulations for fair hiring practices, such as making lower offers based on age, sex, race, etc.
Do you expect them to work "at will" (where you can fire them for any reason and no reason)?
If so, why the fuck should you expect an employee to give you any more courtesy? Employees are not slaves.
Everyone at the top (CXO, board members, top paid employees based on cash plus stock options plus etc.) serves 1 day in prison for every instance of leaked info.
Chase it down through subsidiaries, contractors, shell corporations, spouses, etc.
The other option is mob justice. (Which is fine by me.)
They're "genuine" because they were for hate groups the left likes.
Lies.
https://www.bing.com/images/se...
Why do businesses seldomly take option 2 (build it ourselves) and make it a standalone product the way id Software does with their game engines?
Because when it breaks or someone hacks it, you can't point the finger at an outside entity.
Also because of the guarantee that someone in the room will utter the phrase "reinventing the wheel".
The standard "cupcake with frosting" image includes pink frosting. Chocolate frosting is far more common in real life, but that ends up looking like poop when used in any sort of graphical sense.
White frosting is usually taken to mean vanilla, and vanilla is synonymous with "boring".
Green and blue are unappetizing colors for food.
Strong red (such as frosting) looks like blood and is a hard color to get consistent (be it across print, web, etc., and don't you dare try to JPEG anything with large solid blocks of red).
Yellow has the piss likeness if it's too strong, and looks weak and lame if it's too weak.
Orange? Only for Halloween. (All colors are valid for their respective holidays.)
Pink frosting is the default because it's "fun", doesn't look like a bodily secretion, doesn't look like rotten food, etc.
Go ahead, use your favorite search engine to look up images of real life cupcakes, then look up drawings / clip art / cartoon / etc. cupcakes. Notice the huge spike in representation of pink frosting.
Let's test my theory:
Wubba lubba dub duuuuuuuub!
I need that Szechuan sauce, Morty!
#notmypresident !!!!!
#actually...
Yup. Here's how it works everywhere:
We need to do X. How can we do X and how much will it cost?
We could buy A, it's costs $$$$$ to start / set up and ????? every year after. It'll do 80% of what we need and it says "secure" on the product page.
We could build it ourself. It'll take ??? months to do it, with a team of ?? people, and it'll do what we want and we'll be able to incorporate any changes needed later. It'll be unpolished, unreliable, and deployed too soon, but we'll add maintaining it to an existing employee's duties at no additional cost to us. Oh, other operating costs will be 0 because we'll tell the other department they have to run it since they run the current somewhat-related system that this will never fully replace.
There's this open source thing that does a piece of what we need. We can wrap some crap around that and shit it out the door next month and never touch it again until it all falls apart.
I would. I hate everything.
USB C is proprietary. It's not open or free. It's just popular.
USB C is also crap. Cables that look identical but do different things, ports that look identical but do different things, chipsets that are invisible to users and advertised as "USB C" but do different things, cables that are often unsafe, devices (chargers) that are often unsafe, etc. But it's reversible this time!
You answered Hamlet's question.
Wrong.
If you patch a client that client is safe.
If you patch an AP all clients using that AP are safe.
I hate Google. Thanks.
Apple fans will buy anything, with or a headphone jack, with or without a fingerprint scanner, with or without whatever.
This is just preliminaery
phone.display.poop_emoji
vr_subsystem.aroma.disperse('hydrogen_sulfide')
phone.vibrate
I am an angel investor and would like to offer you $10,000,000 for a 51% stake.
It also assumes you CAN disable access on everything the person has access to.
There's plenty of gear, often at the critical infrastructure level (be it network, power, building monitoring, fire suppression, alarm systems, etc.) that would need a manual touch to change out the lowest level password. Not everything integrates into AD or some management portal, and even the stuff that does usually has a lower-level mode of access.
[X] Monopolies and process patents are evil
[X] Apple is teh suck
I think that film criticism is, over all, better than ever, because, with its new Internet-centrism, it's more democratic than ever
Being democratic doesn't make something good or correct. In fact, it often has the opposite effect. The vast majority of people are not experts in every field. In fact, the majority of people have less than average aptitude in any specific field. Making film criticism, or anything else that benefits from specific knowledge or experience, more "democratic" makes it objectively worse.
I'm no fan of Scorsese. Honestly, the best thing he's ever done is Bad (MJ's music video). http://www.imdb.com/name/nm000...
That said, Scorsese is correct. But he's only speaking out because the internet has allowed people who don't suck the anuses of Hollywood elites to voice their opinion. People and the internet absolutely should be hostile and critical of Hollywood and its products. Everything is fucking shit and has been for a while, yet they want to charge more, cater films to Chinese audiences, squeeze out the theaters showing their films, sue everyone for piracy of works that should be in the public domain or that they already own but can't use on a certain device, etc..
9-15%? I'd sooner believe 90-150%.
You put a dozen focused emitters in various locations and point them at your target, syncing them up for constructive interference.
Shitty affiliate link detected!
Fuck off!
Nope, sorry. Hillary has done plenty of illegal and legal, but unethical and unfair, shit. No one would give half of a Hershey Squirt about some foreigners trolling online or buying ads online.
She lost because she's awful. Get over it.
dam u dum