What I meant is you have to go there in person and hold the interview before even finding what the salary range is. the last thing you want is spending 3h to find out they can only offer you 70% of what you already make.
Sorry man, I am not the one defining them, so there's a very good chance my happiness isn't considered. What they would accomplish though, is remove subjectivity from the workplace. And that, indeed, makes me happy.
Sure: any compliment. Because it might be misinterpreted. Last week a female coworker was complaining in the cafeteria that her ass got fat during the month of January. That's exactly what she said: "my ass got fat, I need to lose weight". A male co-worker looked and said "I don't think it's fat, I think it looks amazing."
See, to me, it's nothing out of the ordinary. It's simple conversation, nothing to it. But the male co-worker could have been fired, if the female co-worker would have gone to HR and complained. How do i know? Similar situations did occur in the past, at my workplace.
I'm not saying I would be surprised, as a matter of fact I would have expected it, which makes me be and act unlike myself, out of fear of being fired for no good reason whatsoever except inadvertently pissing off a female co-worker. And that's why we need clearly defined boundaries.
I tell my wife she's sexy in front of anyone. Judging by your standard, I should be able to tell any female co-worker she's sexy, in front of everybody.
On the other end of the spectrum, if you are dealing with secret information at work, you shouldn't talk about it in front of your family... but wait, according to you that means you shouldn't talk about it at work either. Impasse.
Define "nasty things", please. And while we're at it, please define "hostile" as well.
Right now, as I see things (and please correct me if I'm wrong, with arguments if possible), both those terms are very loosely defined, boiling down to "anything that fits one's agenda".
I really want those defined and clarified, it would help a long way making workplaces a better environment.
Neither. Some time ago, a "Security Update" from Samsung came on, and it had Facebook embedded into the patch. I could not opt out, all I could do was not install the patch, leaving my phone vulnerable. One patch line reads as "Facebook app has been installed". What really pisses me off is that every patch, the Facebook app is re-enabled although I had disabled it. On top of that, Facebook auto-updates itself independently from Google Play, and re-enables itself in the process. Since last year, I am in a continuous struggle with my phone.
Sorry but I didn't want to deflect. I just wanted to make everyone aware that this type of issue is not Microsoft-specific and we should all take that into consideration as well. Maybe it's not fair to say "Fuck you Microsoft" all while they're doing what they know best: imitate what others invented, be it good or bad.
Stop installing Facebook on my phone without me agreeing with that.
But you know what? You can uninstall Facebook app from Windows. Hell, you can uninstall Windows altogether from your PC and still have a usable PC. But I can't uninstall Facebook from my Samsung Galaxy A5 (2016) and I sure as hell can't uninstall Android from it.
Here's the thing. It's not nVidia or AMD. They only build the chips. Moreover, they CAN and WOULD ramp up their chip productions, provided the integrators (AIB cards) ask for them... which they don't. I'm talking about ASUS, Gigabyte, MSI, EVGA, Sapphire (for AMD cards), etc. - these are the ones who won't ramp up productions, and paradoxically they are right as well.
Manufacturing process ain't willy-nilly making a card. It's a complex process involving a multitude of vendors, component providers and logistics. For example ASUS could find themselves holding thousands of GP-10x chips and not enough VRAM to build the cards, because Apple is buying 20% of all vNAND production every year. And guess where GDDR5(x) memory is being produced? Well, in the same fabs that make phone memory (Samsung, Micron, Hynix). There's also the logistics issue. Cards are being shipped by boat; it might take up to 90 days (usually 60+) for the cards to reach the regional warehouses, and another week or so to physically get in stores.
Hogwash, of course they can update it. They can release a patch changing update method to "in-house". Does this require large amounts of coding? Of course. Is it more costly? Sure. But not impossible.
Answered in blockchain documentation. Shortly put: crowd effort does that. Many participants validate the data individually and independently.
Does past records every get erased?
Answered in blockchain documentation. Shortly put: NO.
If entries prove to be erroneous after a few weeks after being added to the chain, how easily can you fix the mistake?
Answered in blockchain documentation. Shortly put: no entry is erroneous once confirmed. They're there forever.
How fast and reliably can you update data (revoke access for instance)?
It really depends on the implementation. The devil is in the details.
Also, I think most implementation of such blockhain protocols do not store data directly in the public ledger but simply store hashes to external data entries, for which it's not clear who has the ownership and if they are publicly available or not.
Answered in blockchain documentation. Shortly put: You think wrong.
Man, you really need to RTFM. Seriously. Do it. It helps.
Nope. Service refusal based on clothing is not discriminatory, because it enforces the same rule to the entire population. It would be discriminatory if it would allow person A to enter without a shirt but person B would not have been allowed.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, due to yellow fever.
You are correct, they do complain.
Nobody wants our shitty-paid jobs, waaaah”
What I meant is you have to go there in person and hold the interview before even finding what the salary range is.
the last thing you want is spending 3h to find out they can only offer you 70% of what you already make.
Not in Romania, they won't.
Employers never, ever post salary ranges, and employees are forbidden from telling them, or they can be fired.
Like sending an hug emoji?
Sorry man, I am not the one defining them, so there's a very good chance my happiness isn't considered.
What they would accomplish though, is remove subjectivity from the workplace. And that, indeed, makes me happy.
Sure: any compliment. Because it might be misinterpreted.
Last week a female coworker was complaining in the cafeteria that her ass got fat during the month of January. That's exactly what she said: "my ass got fat, I need to lose weight". A male co-worker looked and said "I don't think it's fat, I think it looks amazing."
See, to me, it's nothing out of the ordinary. It's simple conversation, nothing to it. But the male co-worker could have been fired, if the female co-worker would have gone to HR and complained. How do i know? Similar situations did occur in the past, at my workplace.
I'm not saying I would be surprised, as a matter of fact I would have expected it, which makes me be and act unlike myself, out of fear of being fired for no good reason whatsoever except inadvertently pissing off a female co-worker. And that's why we need clearly defined boundaries.
I tell my wife she's sexy in front of anyone.
Judging by your standard, I should be able to tell any female co-worker she's sexy, in front of everybody.
On the other end of the spectrum, if you are dealing with secret information at work, you shouldn't talk about it in front of your family... but wait, according to you that means you shouldn't talk about it at work either.
Impasse.
Define "nasty things", please.
And while we're at it, please define "hostile" as well.
Right now, as I see things (and please correct me if I'm wrong, with arguments if possible), both those terms are very loosely defined, boiling down to "anything that fits one's agenda".
I really want those defined and clarified, it would help a long way making workplaces a better environment.
Neither.
Some time ago, a "Security Update" from Samsung came on, and it had Facebook embedded into the patch. I could not opt out, all I could do was not install the patch, leaving my phone vulnerable. One patch line reads as "Facebook app has been installed".
What really pisses me off is that every patch, the Facebook app is re-enabled although I had disabled it. On top of that, Facebook auto-updates itself independently from Google Play, and re-enables itself in the process. Since last year, I am in a continuous struggle with my phone.
Hack Windows.
But neither is a good solution, now, is it?
Sorry but I didn't want to deflect. I just wanted to make everyone aware that this type of issue is not Microsoft-specific and we should all take that into consideration as well.
Maybe it's not fair to say "Fuck you Microsoft" all while they're doing what they know best: imitate what others invented, be it good or bad.
Stop installing Facebook on my phone without me agreeing with that.
But you know what? You can uninstall Facebook app from Windows. Hell, you can uninstall Windows altogether from your PC and still have a usable PC. But I can't uninstall Facebook from my Samsung Galaxy A5 (2016) and I sure as hell can't uninstall Android from it.
So who's the greater evil?
astronomical levels
Hmm... I guess SETI should be used to that.
Here's the thing. It's not nVidia or AMD. They only build the chips. Moreover, they CAN and WOULD ramp up their chip productions, provided the integrators (AIB cards) ask for them... which they don't. I'm talking about ASUS, Gigabyte, MSI, EVGA, Sapphire (for AMD cards), etc. - these are the ones who won't ramp up productions, and paradoxically they are right as well.
Manufacturing process ain't willy-nilly making a card. It's a complex process involving a multitude of vendors, component providers and logistics. For example ASUS could find themselves holding thousands of GP-10x chips and not enough VRAM to build the cards, because Apple is buying 20% of all vNAND production every year. And guess where GDDR5(x) memory is being produced? Well, in the same fabs that make phone memory (Samsung, Micron, Hynix). There's also the logistics issue. Cards are being shipped by boat; it might take up to 90 days (usually 60+) for the cards to reach the regional warehouses, and another week or so to physically get in stores.
The point is you're blaming the wrong parties.
Wrong, it was Luke Starbuckster.
you can drown in semen
I would like to subscribe to your newsletter...
Call me when they go global.
Hogwash, of course they can update it. They can release a patch changing update method to "in-house".
Does this require large amounts of coding? Of course. Is it more costly? Sure. But not impossible.
Who validates the new data that comes in?
Answered in blockchain documentation.
Shortly put: crowd effort does that. Many participants validate the data individually and independently.
Does past records every get erased?
Answered in blockchain documentation.
Shortly put: NO.
If entries prove to be erroneous after a few weeks after being added to the chain, how easily can you fix the mistake?
Answered in blockchain documentation.
Shortly put: no entry is erroneous once confirmed. They're there forever.
How fast and reliably can you update data (revoke access for instance)?
It really depends on the implementation. The devil is in the details.
Also, I think most implementation of such blockhain protocols do not store data directly in the public ledger but simply store hashes to external data entries, for which it's not clear who has the ownership and if they are publicly available or not.
Answered in blockchain documentation.
Shortly put: You think wrong.
Man, you really need to RTFM. Seriously. Do it. It helps.
Translation:
"I am a retardo who disconsidered security questions back in the day and now I got the shaft. It's YOUR FAULT!!!111oneone"
You're welcome.
I'm an amateur in the domain and even I see a huge lack of understanding in your post.
In Soviet Russia, Mail Checks You!
I do. That cellulose-flavor is amazing. Satisfies the bookworm in me.
Nope.
Service refusal based on clothing is not discriminatory, because it enforces the same rule to the entire population.
It would be discriminatory if it would allow person A to enter without a shirt but person B would not have been allowed.