Yes. Am not robot.
Heh. I’ve been blocked from a programming subreddit for being ‘too directly helpful’. Apparently the dozen to-and-fro conversations weren’t enough to show that OP needed more concrete direction.
Hilarious if that sees me banned from the platform at some point.
Probably a Thursday. Never could get the hang of Thursdays.
If we’re very quiet precious, my love, maybe he won’t notice us down here near the bottom of the table.
And relative to other recent offerings, will it just seem better?
Just how many people, that aren’t Trump/Republican mouthpieces or geopolitical foes, really think Zelenskyy is the one who came off looking bad in that exchange?
Yet another ratings-topping embarrassing episode in this new season of America’s ‘great television’ show.
Ahh it’s good to see the US has regained its ‘punchline of the internet’ title after a short four-year return to merely being an embarrassing anecdote.
I don’t have a problem with open lobbying per se. If it’s on behalf of all of the workers and customers as well and not just their own interests.
But can anyone identify such a billionaire?
And by definition that rules out any that step on their workers like bugs…
If you start a ‘permanent role’ with them, having already secured a next role, then it is unethical. That means you know, going in, that this is not effectively ‘permanent’.
However. Having already started with them, if you find a better role, there is nothing unethical about taking that unless it contradicts an enforceable employment agreement. Maybe the role wasn’t what you thought, or someone else has valued you more highly (in remuneration, working conditions or other benefits). It goes both ways and incentivising retention is up to the business - it’s the flipside of lay-offs.