No it isn't. It's called "employment at will" - don't want to work for the wages you've negotiated or keeping the company hostage for group wage increases without merit and you're fired.
There's a reason IT workers never unionize. They're a pretty smart bunch you know and good IT workers never have to worry about getting the wages or wage increases they deserve.
Greenhouse gas emissions per capita has gone down significantly in the US as well, 40% per capita in the US and much more across the UK as well as the rest of the EU. Compared to the sources of energy and overall energy cost, the promised 'cheap and emission-free' solar/wind don't seem to be coming, we're just shifting the emissions.
If $90B is required to keep renewables cheaper than other options, what will happen at the end of that? $90B in taxpayer subsidized energy buys a lot of nuclear plants which they also shut down.
Energy in Germany (with all the subsidies) now costs over 30c/kWh while my small town supplier (primarily hydro/nuclear energy sourced) costs me 3c/kWh (without subsidies).
On the other hand, all this investment in renewables hasn't made nearly any dent in greenhouse gas emissions within Germany over the last 3 decades.
Both "Leave" and "Remain" campaigns have been fined for lying during the campaign. There's quite a few people that have died since, they're also not happy, there's also a growing number of people that have grown up beyond age 26 and find out that once the EU starts taking more than it gives, it isn't all that it's cut out to be, they're also not happy, you will never make everyone happy and people will change their mind.
Off course the ones that voted the other way aren't happy, but if you go straight democracy, that's what you get. Trying to change the rules after the game didn't turn out the way you wanted isn't fair.
Brexit in the end is a "no confidence" vote for both Brussels/Merkel and Cameron/May. Cameron was voted in with the promise he was going to make changes to the EU-UK relationship, the EU insisted on it's continued "members have no sovereignty" platform. The fact that major political voices in The Netherlands, Belgium, France etc are getting more steam with like "leave" platforms goes to say that the people are sick of EU transferring wealth and power at the cost of its middle class. Even Macron conceded recently that if the French were proposed with the question, they would vote to leave (polls show 61% in France and 59% in Netherlands vs UK's 48%).
I'm fine with people not getting vaccines but then the State should also not be required to admit them to a school unless there is a valid reason and a panel of independent doctors can provide proof to that effect.
Vaccinations are available in the entire country. The problem is that state schools don't make vaccination a requirement everywhere because 'discrimination'.
Then what are things going to be such as an outbreak of polio? If you can fix a 'disease' by changing your habits and lifestyle, it's not really a 'disease', it's slow, assisted suicide.
A public health issue is something the CDC can fix with strategic quarantine, a vaccine or antibiotics/antivirals. Changing behaviors is not the job of the government.
It's rather easy to take apart with the right tools. Even stuff that is 'glued together' - get a warming mat and most of the stuff will come right apart.
Apple is pretty good about these things, actually, most manufacturers would take apart the 'expensive' parts if they can be reused. Apple's lineup is pretty much consistent across the board, the displays in this model can be used in similar sized lineups elsewhere or even reused after repair in a bigger case.
I'm sure everyone knows that a doctor currently practicing isn't completely banned from practicing, however history is important. If your surgeon has a history of malpractice with certain populations, it's important to know that, even if she is otherwise a perfect surgeon - if she has a history of poor treatment for your particular issues, I'd want to know.
The GDPR law together with various treaties like the ones on copyright, make sure that those laws in the EU apply to US companies... like Google and Facebook too.
There is a reason so many US companies are worried about GDPR compliance - it applies to anyone interacting with any EU resident or presence, through the Internet, this means worldwide.
Apparently the tribunal didn't agree. "The right to privacy is more important than for the public to find information on the judgment of a medical board"
Her 'lawyer' (speciality in bad media disappearance consulting) had the case sealed and it remained unpublished until the decision was final. Even the "personal information authority" for the country does not agree with the surgeon or the judge since the surgeon still isn't fully cleared from her prior malpractice.
They should just put up a list with all the requests to be forgotten and the links that were affected by them. Kind of like they do with DMCA but with more detail.
You obviously have no idea. IP's are "personal information": https://www.alstonprivacy.com/... ; A website by definition serves anyone on the internet ; The rest of your post is likewise red herrings, GDPR is not concerned with whether or not an individual is an EU citizen, anyone located in an EU country is protected by GDPR and can apply for the protections under it. According to one law firm that tries to explain it: "it is likely that EU citizens residing in the US will be given the same protections as those living in an EU country". If you operate a hotel, how would you limit your offers, the goal is to sell yourself to as much visitors as possible, not serving people from the EU would be discrimination in many countries.
A law that is designed so literally nobody understands or can comply with. Virtually any collection of data is liable under GDPR -worldwide-, logging IP's on your server anywhere, you're liable, any website reachable from the EU with an online form, liable. Employ anyone from the EU - you're liable; travel through the EU - you're liable, serve an EU citizen in your hotel, liable.
The network wasn't built to be robust or redundant, it was designed to be cheap to install, decentralized and remain usable during war. The redundancy came in the form of physical structures and weapons, the network just had to be able to continue working if an entire segment disappeared.
The interesting thing is that the ONLY times in history when someone used people's values and traditions and turned them against them was borne out of socialism. Hitler, Stalin, Franco, Mussolini, Pol Pot, Chavez all appealed to people's disdain for corporations and government and willingness to give up everything for 'free stuff'. Your life may be miserable, but it would be a lot more miserable if you believe the government can help you, at least (healthy market) corporations have limits and a reason to keep themselves in line - competition, governments have no limit and few governments are willing to compete with other governments.
Slashdot Mirror
No it isn't. It's called "employment at will" - don't want to work for the wages you've negotiated or keeping the company hostage for group wage increases without merit and you're fired.
There's a reason IT workers never unionize. They're a pretty smart bunch you know and good IT workers never have to worry about getting the wages or wage increases they deserve.
Greenhouse gas emissions per capita has gone down significantly in the US as well, 40% per capita in the US and much more across the UK as well as the rest of the EU. Compared to the sources of energy and overall energy cost, the promised 'cheap and emission-free' solar/wind don't seem to be coming, we're just shifting the emissions.
If $90B is required to keep renewables cheaper than other options, what will happen at the end of that? $90B in taxpayer subsidized energy buys a lot of nuclear plants which they also shut down.
Energy in Germany (with all the subsidies) now costs over 30c/kWh while my small town supplier (primarily hydro/nuclear energy sourced) costs me 3c/kWh (without subsidies).
On the other hand, all this investment in renewables hasn't made nearly any dent in greenhouse gas emissions within Germany over the last 3 decades.
Both "Leave" and "Remain" campaigns have been fined for lying during the campaign. There's quite a few people that have died since, they're also not happy, there's also a growing number of people that have grown up beyond age 26 and find out that once the EU starts taking more than it gives, it isn't all that it's cut out to be, they're also not happy, you will never make everyone happy and people will change their mind.
Off course the ones that voted the other way aren't happy, but if you go straight democracy, that's what you get. Trying to change the rules after the game didn't turn out the way you wanted isn't fair.
Brexit in the end is a "no confidence" vote for both Brussels/Merkel and Cameron/May. Cameron was voted in with the promise he was going to make changes to the EU-UK relationship, the EU insisted on it's continued "members have no sovereignty" platform. The fact that major political voices in The Netherlands, Belgium, France etc are getting more steam with like "leave" platforms goes to say that the people are sick of EU transferring wealth and power at the cost of its middle class. Even Macron conceded recently that if the French were proposed with the question, they would vote to leave (polls show 61% in France and 59% in Netherlands vs UK's 48%).
I'm fine with people not getting vaccines but then the State should also not be required to admit them to a school unless there is a valid reason and a panel of independent doctors can provide proof to that effect.
>50% of people voted for Brexit. Calling people stupid because they have a certain political view, is in itself stupid.
Vaccinations are available in the entire country. The problem is that state schools don't make vaccination a requirement everywhere because 'discrimination'.
No, that's up to the states
Then what are things going to be such as an outbreak of polio? If you can fix a 'disease' by changing your habits and lifestyle, it's not really a 'disease', it's slow, assisted suicide.
A public health issue is something the CDC can fix with strategic quarantine, a vaccine or antibiotics/antivirals. Changing behaviors is not the job of the government.
As opposed to Soviet plants like AOC or Palestinian plants like Tlaib? I think if hackers ran the world, we'd be a lot better off.
It's rather easy to take apart with the right tools. Even stuff that is 'glued together' - get a warming mat and most of the stuff will come right apart.
Apple is pretty good about these things, actually, most manufacturers would take apart the 'expensive' parts if they can be reused. Apple's lineup is pretty much consistent across the board, the displays in this model can be used in similar sized lineups elsewhere or even reused after repair in a bigger case.
I'm sure everyone knows that a doctor currently practicing isn't completely banned from practicing, however history is important. If your surgeon has a history of malpractice with certain populations, it's important to know that, even if she is otherwise a perfect surgeon - if she has a history of poor treatment for your particular issues, I'd want to know.
The GDPR law together with various treaties like the ones on copyright, make sure that those laws in the EU apply to US companies... like Google and Facebook too.
There is a reason so many US companies are worried about GDPR compliance - it applies to anyone interacting with any EU resident or presence, through the Internet, this means worldwide.
GDPR states that you are liable even if you are a foreign entity. Kind of like the US laws apply abroad to US citizens.
The courts anonymized and sealed the records.
Apparently the tribunal didn't agree. "The right to privacy is more important than for the public to find information on the judgment of a medical board"
This article has more detail: https://www.villamedia.nl/arti...
Her 'lawyer' (speciality in bad media disappearance consulting) had the case sealed and it remained unpublished until the decision was final. Even the "personal information authority" for the country does not agree with the surgeon or the judge since the surgeon still isn't fully cleared from her prior malpractice.
They should just put up a list with all the requests to be forgotten and the links that were affected by them. Kind of like they do with DMCA but with more detail.
You obviously have no idea. IP's are "personal information": https://www.alstonprivacy.com/... ; A website by definition serves anyone on the internet ; The rest of your post is likewise red herrings, GDPR is not concerned with whether or not an individual is an EU citizen, anyone located in an EU country is protected by GDPR and can apply for the protections under it. According to one law firm that tries to explain it: "it is likely that EU citizens residing in the US will be given the same protections as those living in an EU country". If you operate a hotel, how would you limit your offers, the goal is to sell yourself to as much visitors as possible, not serving people from the EU would be discrimination in many countries.
Do you say the same when it comes to China or North Korea? Oppressive, protectionist laws are equally oppressive regardless of the current regime.
A law that is designed so literally nobody understands or can comply with. Virtually any collection of data is liable under GDPR -worldwide-, logging IP's on your server anywhere, you're liable, any website reachable from the EU with an online form, liable. Employ anyone from the EU - you're liable; travel through the EU - you're liable, serve an EU citizen in your hotel, liable.
The network wasn't built to be robust or redundant, it was designed to be cheap to install, decentralized and remain usable during war. The redundancy came in the form of physical structures and weapons, the network just had to be able to continue working if an entire segment disappeared.
The interesting thing is that the ONLY times in history when someone used people's values and traditions and turned them against them was borne out of socialism. Hitler, Stalin, Franco, Mussolini, Pol Pot, Chavez all appealed to people's disdain for corporations and government and willingness to give up everything for 'free stuff'. Your life may be miserable, but it would be a lot more miserable if you believe the government can help you, at least (healthy market) corporations have limits and a reason to keep themselves in line - competition, governments have no limit and few governments are willing to compete with other governments.