There is neither a need to give notice nor is there a requirement for employers to pay you for that time if you do. They're only required to pay you for the time you actually work. If your friend got a "3 month paid vacation" by giving 3 months notice, it just means his company's HR department forgot to terminate his employment and the payroll department never caught the mistake. That's pretty unlikely at most companies. I didn't believe this at first (because I've given two weeks notice and been walked out with pay for those weeks), but it's true, at least in California.
8. Q. I just gave my employer two weeks advance notice that I was quitting. Instead of letting me work until the date of my resignation, he told me that I was discharged, and instructed me to collect my personal belongings and leave. Upon leaving he gave me a check for all wages earned up through my last hour of work. Am I entitled to be paid for the time that I gave notice? Additionally, when must my final wages be paid?
A. You are not entitled to any wages for the notice period because you did not perform any work during that period. For the purpose of wage payments, your employer changed a quit into a discharge, and all of your earned wages became due and payable immediately at the time he terminated you.
Giving notice is purely a courtesy. It legally can not affect recommendations or references This I'm skeptical of because every employee handbook I've been subject to says no notice = no references. I lost good references because I didn't give a full two weeks notice, which was the company's policy.
Though inspiration commonly implies action, it is not necessarily action in itself. It is the difference between a "call to action" and a "call for a specific action". Verb versus noun.
Suggesting that prose intended to inspire must limit inspiration by declaring a solid course of action is to misinterpret the author's intention.
Just because I feel something must be done doesn't mean I know what it is that must be done. And that's not always bad. Especially when neither coincide with reality.
An excellent interpretation of the indie/mainstream relationship, and indirectly why the two will never be completely separate, can be found here. It's not quite as simple as not buying RIAA-asociated stuff.
The larger the beast, the more devastated it leaves its environment when it dies. Currently, the RIAA is like a dragon (pardon the dorkitude) pillaging and demanding appeasement in return for "protection." It's too late to simply ignore it and hope it dies silently. And what's to stop it from demanding what you hold dear as its next sacrifice?
The original poster's cliche is a call to action. In this context I don't believe stating which action to take is necessary, as that decision could be very personal.
Conversely, your retort is self-deprecating. When you're finished reciting your own cliche-ridden "drivel" and "bitching", would you care to offer a plan of your own?
Because otherwise, honestly, you're not being very productive.
For that matter, I later reflected, he should be happy simply that he makes enough money to have food to eat, to provide for himself and his loved ones, and not to have to go to bed wondering where his next meal will be coming from. All of us that can say that should be thankful for it.
Not necessarily. Remember all that is gold does not glitter, and not all who wander are lost.
Compare the source media to a version run through a lossy compression algorithm. If the two are recognizably similar, then you have determined that media source's originally intended format.
Running an audio file converted to an image through a JPEG or GIF compressor will result in irreversibly useless garbage. This has a lot to do with the vast differences in different media types' notions of space over time. Audio frames are much smaller than video frames.
Considering there are entire musical genres consisting of people just talking (think poetry/spoken word), along with other non-musical copyrighted audio (very popular in reggae and dancehall, for example), I doubt the industry juggernauts would bother to flinch at the idea that audio valuable enough to trade in any significant amounts isn't worth manually examining and cataloguing.
Slashdot Mirror
http://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/FAQ_Paydays.htm
8. Q. I just gave my employer two weeks advance notice that I was quitting. Instead of letting me work until the date of my resignation, he told me that I was discharged, and instructed me to collect my personal belongings and leave. Upon leaving he gave me a check for all wages earned up through my last hour of work. Am I entitled to be paid for the time that I gave notice? Additionally, when must my final wages be paid?
A. You are not entitled to any wages for the notice period because you did not perform any work during that period. For the purpose of wage payments, your employer changed a quit into a discharge, and all of your earned wages became due and payable immediately at the time he terminated you. Giving notice is purely a courtesy. It legally can not affect recommendations or references This I'm skeptical of because every employee handbook I've been subject to says no notice = no references. I lost good references because I didn't give a full two weeks notice, which was the company's policy.
Though inspiration commonly implies action, it is not necessarily action in itself. It is the difference between a "call to action" and a "call for a specific action". Verb versus noun.
Suggesting that prose intended to inspire must limit inspiration by declaring a solid course of action is to misinterpret the author's intention.
Just because I feel something must be done doesn't mean I know what it is that must be done. And that's not always bad. Especially when neither coincide with reality.
An excellent interpretation of the indie/mainstream relationship, and indirectly why the two will never be completely separate, can be found
here. It's not quite as simple as not buying RIAA-asociated stuff.
The larger the beast, the more devastated it leaves its environment when it dies. Currently, the RIAA is like a dragon (pardon the dorkitude) pillaging and demanding appeasement in return for "protection." It's too late to simply ignore it and hope it dies silently. And what's to stop it from demanding what you hold dear as its next sacrifice?
The original poster's cliche is a call to action. In this context I don't believe stating which action to take is necessary, as that decision could be very personal.
Conversely, your retort is self-deprecating. When you're finished reciting your own cliche-ridden "drivel" and "bitching", would you care to offer a plan of your own?
Because otherwise, honestly, you're not being very productive.
For that matter, I later reflected, he should be happy simply that he makes enough money to have food to eat, to provide for himself and his loved ones, and not to have to go to bed wondering where his next meal will be coming from. All of us that can say that should be thankful for it.
Not necessarily. Remember all that is gold does not glitter, and not all who wander are lost.
Compare the source media to a version run through a lossy compression algorithm. If the two are recognizably similar, then you have determined that media source's originally intended format.
Running an audio file converted to an image through a JPEG or GIF compressor will result in irreversibly useless garbage. This has a lot to do with the vast differences in different media types' notions of space over time. Audio frames are much smaller than video frames.
Considering there are entire musical genres consisting of people just talking (think poetry/spoken word), along with other non-musical copyrighted audio (very popular in reggae and dancehall, for example), I doubt the industry juggernauts would bother to flinch at the idea that audio valuable enough to trade in any significant amounts isn't worth manually examining and cataloguing.