I can certainly see how feeling lonely can lead to ill health effects. However feeling lonely and being alone are two different animals. One is a state of mind while the other is just a state of proximity.
We save billions of dollars importing products produced for far less than we could and we breathe clean air and drink clean water. If this is losing then I'd hate to see what winning looks like.
Online companies are using the same BS strategy from the first internet boom and this one will end just as badly. Promise users the world for free (to build scale rapidly), become the dominant player in your niche, and then come up with a business plan that entails taking back the expensive but high-utility services that customers came to you in the first place for. The process is entirely backwards because it eliminates the price-discovery feedback loop that businesses need in order to establish whether their business model/pricing is even workable.
I wouldn't have used the word phishing either. But it's not a question of tech vs non-tech but of conversational English. Saying the email was fake would have done the trick, since the question posed to him was "Is the notice real?"
And furthermore, if the IT guy believed the email saying Posesta's account was hacked is illegitimate then why would he instruct Podesta to change his email password?
Who uses the word "illegitimate" to describe a phishing email? It's more likely the IT guy thought the email was authentic and is now trying to cover for his incompetence.
Sure, just like the scene from Mars Attacks where the Martians kept repeating "don't run, we are your friends" as they walked through the streets evaporating humans with their phasers.
I think it could be argued that profit is a business necessity, since without it a business wouldn't exist. If one class/nationality of worker is willing to do the work for 1/2 the cost of another and the competency/productivity level can be demonstrated to be the same then I think there's an argument for those hires out of competitive necessity.
Thanks for the link. Here's a clause which I found relevant for this discussion:
This form of discrimination occurs where an employer does not intend to discriminate; to the contrary, it occurs when identical standards or procedures are applied to everyone, despite the fact that they lead to a substantial difference in employment outcomes for the members of a particular group and they are unrelated to successful job performance. An important thing to note is that disparate impact is not, in and of itself, illegal.[13] This is because disparate impact only becomes illegal if the employer cannot justify the employment practice causing the adverse impact as a "job related for the position in question and consistent with business necessity" (called the "business necessity defense").[14]
I think they can argue it's not discrimination by listing legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons why they picked the Indians over Americans. The prime reason could be cost, and they could potentially prove their case by listing rejected salary offers they made to prospective American hires.
Slashdot Mirror
Meteor
Spontaneous combustion
Explosive free radicals
I've been way thing for a new cold deck for joyce recordings.
Not sure how one can say Apple doesn't control pricing when their App Store distribution applies a 30% fixed revenue share.
I'll phrase my question in his preferred, more-readable syntax:
What.Will?.He?.Do?.At?.His?.New?.Venture?
C is not the next great thing. But is still the one of the best things and will always be a workhorse.
I can certainly see how feeling lonely can lead to ill health effects. However feeling lonely and being alone are two different animals. One is a state of mind while the other is just a state of proximity.
To get itself installed then maybe the software is lacking in merit.
If only their engineers knew basic math, the kind that would allow them to not miscalculate basic real metrics let alone the fraudulent ones.
We save billions of dollars importing products produced for far less than we could and we breathe clean air and drink clean water. If this is losing then I'd hate to see what winning looks like.
I don't quite follow what you mean - why is there a presumption that people gave it a bad review due to it not being their type of game?
And my financial advice from vines.
Scale = revenue and the main cost of dropbox's business is servers, storage, and backbone bandwidth.
Online companies are using the same BS strategy from the first internet boom and this one will end just as badly. Promise users the world for free (to build scale rapidly), become the dominant player in your niche, and then come up with a business plan that entails taking back the expensive but high-utility services that customers came to you in the first place for. The process is entirely backwards because it eliminates the price-discovery feedback loop that businesses need in order to establish whether their business model/pricing is even workable.
Because it's an uncommon turn of phrase in that context.
I wouldn't have used the word phishing either. But it's not a question of tech vs non-tech but of conversational English. Saying the email was fake would have done the trick, since the question posed to him was "Is the notice real?"
And furthermore, if the IT guy believed the email saying Posesta's account was hacked is illegitimate then why would he instruct Podesta to change his email password?
Who uses the word "illegitimate" to describe a phishing email? It's more likely the IT guy thought the email was authentic and is now trying to cover for his incompetence.
Such as tinder requests.
Sure, just like the scene from Mars Attacks where the Martians kept repeating "don't run, we are your friends" as they walked through the streets evaporating humans with their phasers.
I think it could be argued that profit is a business necessity, since without it a business wouldn't exist. If one class/nationality of worker is willing to do the work for 1/2 the cost of another and the competency/productivity level can be demonstrated to be the same then I think there's an argument for those hires out of competitive necessity.
Do you have a reference that documents this? Not doubting you - just interested in reading the historical account of this.
Thanks for the link. Here's a clause which I found relevant for this discussion:
This form of discrimination occurs where an employer does not intend to discriminate; to the contrary, it occurs when identical standards or procedures are applied to everyone, despite the fact that they lead to a substantial difference in employment outcomes for the members of a particular group and they are unrelated to successful job performance. An important thing to note is that disparate impact is not, in and of itself, illegal.[13] This is because disparate impact only becomes illegal if the employer cannot justify the employment practice causing the adverse impact as a "job related for the position in question and consistent with business necessity" (called the "business necessity defense").[14]
err, typo: "affected Walmart's business..."
It hasn't seemed to effect Walmart's business too negatively even though shoppers know that nearly everything sold in the store is made in China.
I think they can argue it's not discrimination by listing legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons why they picked the Indians over Americans. The prime reason could be cost, and they could potentially prove their case by listing rejected salary offers they made to prospective American hires.