An interesting idea, but you have to remember that Hollywood Accounting is already in place. Example: Walmart (etc) is under too much scrutiny, so they can't hire any illegals directly. However, they contract janitorial duties to some small, local firm, with minimal oversight. This firm then hires all of the illegals, and takes the fall when the time comes. They quickly declare bankruptcy, and get away with it. Meanwhile, Walmart has already reaped the benefit.
This doesn't even account for shell corporations and the like.
There's probably a lot of stuff that you've looked at over time that changes what they think of you. There's really no way of knowing how interested you are in something, only what you've been interested in. Check your Youtube history - I bet there's a LOT of stuff in there that you really don't care about that's skewing the results. This includes any random YouTube link you've clicked.
Failing that, If YouTube actually doesn't know anything about you, or it can't find more appropriate ads, it will default to mass-market ads for things like cars, sugar-water, and new movies.
Thing is, there is no trust in the chain of connections. While my telco can tell where the call came in to their system, it would have to trust that the next link is being honest. Eventually, your options are to block all calls from entire countries, or do nothing, since it's all spoofed.
Now, I am OK with blocking all calls that originate in another country, but many would not be.
I've always wondered why there weren't honeypot IDs. Fake SS#, card numbers, etc, that would serve as a red flag of fraudulent activity. While the calls may be untraceable, most payloads should not be.
if it is corporate policy not to say anything beyond verifying dates of employment and possibly other facts such as title and last salary.
But that's not what you said. You said "We can only say positive things about the employee. I will therefore remain silent."
This is very different from "Our policy says that we cannot give any review of any employee's service"
While it may be difficult to get the new employer to say why they didn't hire you, there are plenty that will admit that it happened at the reference check.
If you can intentionally convey a message, it can be taken that way, and be used in court that way. A jury would certainly agree that it was meant as a negative review. Specifics may be difficult to nail down, but financial harm would be easy enough to prove. Even worse, this doesn't even have the benefit of using truth as an absolute defense.
Realistically, if the employee was good I would say so, otherwise silence tells its own story.
And therein lies the problem. Silence then becomes a negative, and can open them up to a lawsuit.
More to the point, the very premise of providing a reference serves no purpose to the former employer, and is only done as a professional courtesy to the new employer. The status of the employee is meaningless to the old, so why risk a lawsuit when there is nothing to be gained?
How many hours per week are spent doing sysadmin for your company, then vs. now? It sounds like you've embraced the cloud, which includes a very sizable amount of moving the work from internal to external.
When I moved to a new city, I had to cancel my newspaper subscription. When they asked why, I told that I was moving out of their delivery area.
They immediately added me to their telemarketing list, calling from all sorts of questionable numbers, completely oblivious to the fact that I would not be able to accept any offers they could give me.
Legally, you're probably correct. However, for that to be an issue, someone would have to come forward and claim ownership of the code. This would open the author to all sorts of criminal charges.
I suspect the source is not linked, for the same reason that MythBusters won't show all of their stuff. It doesn't really improve the report, and it would only help copycats looking to exploit it for personal gain. Anyone with a professional interest would find it quickly enough anyway.
What defines "superior" and "good" vary by user. While there are many who point out that Beta had better picture quality, the feature that most users wanted was length of recording. Therefore, the "better" option was VHS.
The purpose of marketing is to sell a product, specifically the product you are marketing. There is plenty of counter-marketing, and people will generally decide based on that. While JVC (etc) were promoting a cheaper machine, with a longer recording time, Beta was promoted for picture quality. Consumers chose the former.
Most end-users are given the options of buying a Mac (ready to go), buying a Windows PC (ready to go), or building a PC, installing Linux themselves, and hoping it all goes well, and then having very little support if it doesn't. For people that just want to do e-mail and web-browsing, this is going to be a very tough sell.
Even better is the reason why cyclists have to use the street, vs the sidewalk - Cyclists are expected to be predictable, and follow a set pattern (i.e. the rules of the road), whereas pedestrians are presumed to be completely unpredictable.
Do the crazy cyclists just not grasp the physics of getting hit by a car?
Cable stations are bundled. OTA stations are not. Most markets only have a handful of OTA stations anyway (usually the local affiliates of ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox, and PBS)
I'm not sure it would fall under SLAPP (perhaps something else, though)
Regardless, the idea of a "gotcha" moment does not work in US courts. The evidence would be shared with the other side well in advance of the court date, and arguments would be tailored accordingly.
The whole point of Google Fiber was to scare Comcast, etc into doing better. It's growing because the incumbents haven't changed their practices outside of those markets. They're still hoping to scare them by taking some big markets, and threatening bigger markets.
Regardless, even if Google went full-speed ahead, it would take a long time to roll out to most major markets.
Pleasure is usually the catch-all for when your needs don't really fit into any other category. It implies joyriding, and is one of the most expensive.
We have the same 1 week delay (Ohio), and up to 4 attempts. If you failed the test 4 times, you had to go back and do more classes/training/etc.
Perhaps my area was just easy, but I'd never heard of anyone making plans at an easier location, let alone counting on failing the first time. Which isn't to say that no one failed (many failed for not using the center turn lane), but no one went into it expecting to fail.
I'm curious though- why were one-way streets an issue? Or is it just that one-ways usually mean heavy traffic, etc?
Slashdot Mirror
An interesting idea, but you have to remember that Hollywood Accounting is already in place.
Example: Walmart (etc) is under too much scrutiny, so they can't hire any illegals directly. However, they contract janitorial duties to some small, local firm, with minimal oversight. This firm then hires all of the illegals, and takes the fall when the time comes. They quickly declare bankruptcy, and get away with it. Meanwhile, Walmart has already reaped the benefit.
This doesn't even account for shell corporations and the like.
There's probably a lot of stuff that you've looked at over time that changes what they think of you. There's really no way of knowing how interested you are in something, only what you've been interested in. Check your Youtube history - I bet there's a LOT of stuff in there that you really don't care about that's skewing the results. This includes any random YouTube link you've clicked.
Related: Tivo Thinks I'm Gay
Failing that, If YouTube actually doesn't know anything about you, or it can't find more appropriate ads, it will default to mass-market ads for things like cars, sugar-water, and new movies.
This is how Hulu operates with the default Adblock settings.
It's still a lot better than seeing the same ad for hippie soap, or some menopause drug, every single time.
Thing is, there is no trust in the chain of connections. While my telco can tell where the call came in to their system, it would have to trust that the next link is being honest. Eventually, your options are to block all calls from entire countries, or do nothing, since it's all spoofed.
Now, I am OK with blocking all calls that originate in another country, but many would not be.
I've always wondered why there weren't honeypot IDs. Fake SS#, card numbers, etc, that would serve as a red flag of fraudulent activity. While the calls may be untraceable, most payloads should not be.
But that's not what you said. You said "We can only say positive things about the employee. I will therefore remain silent."
This is very different from "Our policy says that we cannot give any review of any employee's service"
While it may be difficult to get the new employer to say why they didn't hire you, there are plenty that will admit that it happened at the reference check.
If you can intentionally convey a message, it can be taken that way, and be used in court that way. A jury would certainly agree that it was meant as a negative review.
Specifics may be difficult to nail down, but financial harm would be easy enough to prove. Even worse, this doesn't even have the benefit of using truth as an absolute defense.
And therein lies the problem. Silence then becomes a negative, and can open them up to a lawsuit.
More to the point, the very premise of providing a reference serves no purpose to the former employer, and is only done as a professional courtesy to the new employer. The status of the employee is meaningless to the old, so why risk a lawsuit when there is nothing to be gained?
How many hours per week are spent doing sysadmin for your company, then vs. now? It sounds like you've embraced the cloud, which includes a very sizable amount of moving the work from internal to external.
Comcast is buying Time Warner, not the other way around.
No one is getting away from Comcast with that deal, quite the opposite actually
When I moved to a new city, I had to cancel my newspaper subscription. When they asked why, I told that I was moving out of their delivery area.
They immediately added me to their telemarketing list, calling from all sorts of questionable numbers, completely oblivious to the fact that I would not be able to accept any offers they could give me.
Legally, you're probably correct. However, for that to be an issue, someone would have to come forward and claim ownership of the code. This would open the author to all sorts of criminal charges.
I suspect the source is not linked, for the same reason that MythBusters won't show all of their stuff. It doesn't really improve the report, and it would only help copycats looking to exploit it for personal gain. Anyone with a professional interest would find it quickly enough anyway.
What defines "superior" and "good" vary by user. While there are many who point out that Beta had better picture quality, the feature that most users wanted was length of recording. Therefore, the "better" option was VHS.
The purpose of marketing is to sell a product, specifically the product you are marketing. There is plenty of counter-marketing, and people will generally decide based on that. While JVC (etc) were promoting a cheaper machine, with a longer recording time, Beta was promoted for picture quality. Consumers chose the former.
Most end-users are given the options of buying a Mac (ready to go), buying a Windows PC (ready to go), or building a PC, installing Linux themselves, and hoping it all goes well, and then having very little support if it doesn't. For people that just want to do e-mail and web-browsing, this is going to be a very tough sell.
Even better is the reason why cyclists have to use the street, vs the sidewalk - Cyclists are expected to be predictable, and follow a set pattern (i.e. the rules of the road), whereas pedestrians are presumed to be completely unpredictable.
Do the crazy cyclists just not grasp the physics of getting hit by a car?
The FCC disagrees: http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/retransmission-consent
Also, everything I could find about statutory royalties only applied to audio recordings.
Cable stations are bundled. OTA stations are not.
Most markets only have a handful of OTA stations anyway (usually the local affiliates of ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox, and PBS)
Sometimes these are all owned by a single corporation.
I'm not sure it would fall under SLAPP (perhaps something else, though)
Regardless, the idea of a "gotcha" moment does not work in US courts. The evidence would be shared with the other side well in advance of the court date, and arguments would be tailored accordingly.
Nah, The Simpsons covered that years ago
The whole point of Google Fiber was to scare Comcast, etc into doing better. It's growing because the incumbents haven't changed their practices outside of those markets. They're still hoping to scare them by taking some big markets, and threatening bigger markets.
Regardless, even if Google went full-speed ahead, it would take a long time to roll out to most major markets.
Pleasure is usually the catch-all for when your needs don't really fit into any other category. It implies joyriding, and is one of the most expensive.
Each state has its own rules on that issue. Most have pathetically low requirements (a quick Googling shows that most places require $50k)
That being said, I believe $100k/$300k (injury per person/total injury per accident) is the typical policy
For the physical analogy, it may not always be that simple. There was this case, but there were more details involved.
It may not be rational, but that same reaction is very common. This is not a sign of a healthy and functioning democracy.
I believe that is the point he was trying to make.
He could, however, put up a page (anywhere else) detailing his version of the events.
Once this has been done, anyone else (such as the person inquiring) can update the wikipedia article with a link to that page.
We have the same 1 week delay (Ohio), and up to 4 attempts. If you failed the test 4 times, you had to go back and do more classes/training/etc.
Perhaps my area was just easy, but I'd never heard of anyone making plans at an easier location, let alone counting on failing the first time. Which isn't to say that no one failed (many failed for not using the center turn lane), but no one went into it expecting to fail.
I'm curious though- why were one-way streets an issue? Or is it just that one-ways usually mean heavy traffic, etc?