At least in our country everyone knows that cigarettes causes cancer. Even 50% of the packet required to have warning that says cigarettes causes death. Who cares.
Can anyone please share your personal experience with AWS Solutions Architect certification? I hope to complete it someday. Do you have any other suggestion?
VFS for Git is deprecated, although something incorporating its approach is likely to best way to implement a real monorepo. Which AFAIK doesn't exist, outside of proprietary implementations used inside certain big tech companies.
Just curious, how much money they can save firing 10% employee? so they can survive almost 10% more days, right? It seems to me it is not that much effective.
Wait, no, that's not right. Say you have $100 in the bank and you make $100/month and spend $110/month on people and that's the only expenditure.
You're going to survive 10 months.
Suppose you fire 10%, so now you spend $99/month and let's say revenue is linear, so now you make $90/month. You're now going to last 100/9 = 11.11 months and that's more than 10% longer already.
Now if you fire from positions that you got in anticipation of them contributing but they don't then you could even go negative to positive.
So it's not 10% more days even in the worst case where you are running something like a consulting business where revenue is proportional to number of heads and for complex operations it can make you profitable.
They're profitable, so it's not that they're trying to stretch out some fixed pool of money. One big thing that reducing costs can do is help them stay profitable as the economy gets worse, although that's not the only reason they might want to do something like this.
probably you were in a hurry or distressed and didn't read the text while deleting the account and probably, you have disabled your account. They will offer an option to disable account in case you change your mind later. Please stop spreading misinformation.
What do you mean “upheld”? The story in your link describes the company refusing to comply and then ends. It’s true that you don’t have to be currently living in the EU to invoke your GDPR rights if you’re an EU citizen traveling abroad, or if you’re a foreign citizen traveling or residing in the EU. GDPR applies to companies that market to people in the EU or do business in the EU. BUT - GDPR is an EU law, it does not apply to US citizens living in the US, which is why the company in your story was legally entitled to refuse to comply.
You're quite wrong. GDPR can apply to citizens in the US, and the link I posted shows the ICO enforcing it in their favour. SCL Elections Ltd was taken to court and then fined £15,000 for not complying with that US resident's request.https://ico.org.uk/about-the-ico/news-and-events/news-and-bl...
I expect that US resident could also have brought a civil lawsuit, at least in UK courts, for damages.
The EU and UK GDPRs can also apply to companies in the US, or elsewhere. That's because location of the business (including subsidiaries) OR location of the individuals, are hooks under the GDPR's territoriality tests in Article 3. You usually need one or the other though; the way GDPR Article 3 works, it's pretty hard to imagine it applying to a US-only business in respect of US resident-individuals.
Yes it can apply to US citizens in certain cases, I thought I agreed with you on that, did I not? It’s still a fact that GDPR does not always (or even normally) apply to US residents doing business with US companies. UK courts have no authority over US companies operating only in the US with US residents who aren’t traveling abroad. Cambridge Analytica is a British company, that is why GDPR applies to them. So yes, I was wrong to conclude prematurely based on your link that this example is one where the company was legally entitled to refuse to comply. But the take-home message doesn’t change - GDPR doesn’t automatically apply to non-EU residents or non-EU companies, unless or until one or both parties has some EU involvement.
The part I most disagreed with is "GDPR is an EU law, it does not apply to US citizens living in the US". Yes it does, I provided an example. Your follow up is a lot closer to the mark.
GDPR is an EU law. It doesn’t automatically apply to people in the US. That’s the only reason I replied - your original framing left an implied suggestion that it might commonly or by default apply to US citizens, without discussing under what conditions. Arguing that you don’t have to be an EU resident leaves the misleading impression that the EU doesn’t have to be involved. I think it’s important to note that the EU part is required somewhere in the company-customer relationship for GDPR to have any say in the matter, and it’s important specifically because this is a common misconception and the misconception is being abused in some cases to coerce compliance where it’s not legally required. I know this as a US business owner that gets emails from US companies on behalf of US citizens that are demanding certain actions and rights under GDPR, without a legal basis to do so.
That is perhaps pedantically true in a way you almost certainly don't mean, that there is no longer 'the GDPR', there is now the EU's GDPR and the UK's GDPR (both using that name) ... but basically false.
As I said above, it was kept with the necessary amendments. That documents title: GDPR - Keeling Schedule. Introductory paragraph:
> This schedule has been prepared by the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport. It is intended for illustrative purposes only to assist the reader in understanding the changes to be made to the retained General Data Protection Regulation by the Data Protection, Privacy and Electronic Communications (Amendments etc)(EU Exit) Regulations 2019 (as amended by the Data Protection, Privacy and Electronic Communications (Amendments etc)(EU Exit) Regulations 2020 (subject to Parliamentary approval) when these come into force.
I'm pretty sure you can't "sue" under the GDPR. The best you can do is report them to your country's privacy regulator but so far all of them are absolutely incompetent or unwilling to enforce the regulation.
Even your computer has delete and cancel button. Isn't the cancel button opposite of immediate deletion when I am explicitly trying to delete file. Hope you can understand and don't mock others.
I can't speak for him, but I would highly doubt that his motivation was money. Fulfilment from achieving success cannot be narrowed down to money only.
I also don't think age has anything to do with the desire for success.
