gonzoleroy

Private Trump, you’re a disgusting fat-body. Your ass looks like about 215 pounds of chewed bubblegum, do you know that?

Thank fuck for the vacuum. The Son of Shark, the Anti-Calculus, Destroyer of Integrals

Just beat it (beat it)

I suppose employee value is for any given company to decide. Companies that determine there is value in having employees onsite, and as we know there are plenty of them out there, may place more value on their in-office employees–even if they allow certain positions to be remote.

From what I’ve seen many remote advocates don’t want to discuss the extra benefits they receive from working remotely as compared with their in-office peers, but it’s true nonetheless.

I say all this not because I’m anti-WFH, but because I advocate equal compensation for all employees. Folks who expect equal pay while also having zero or reduced commute burden are thinking only of themselves as I see it. Commuting is a pain in the ass, the costs are always rising, and it’s been a problem that employers have passed on to workers for entirely too long. So as long as employees find ways like WFH to mitigate the problem, all employees should benefit in some way. Fair is fair for all, not just some.

Because remote employees don’t spend their own time and money on commuting to work. Those factors, along with saving on childcare, are the main drivers for desire to work remote, yes?

A company can reduce its office footprint to account for fewer in-person employees and save money. But that alone doesn’t address the factors above faced by employees who commute, so those workers should be compensated.

Maybe that’s the approach for hiring…remote employees are hired with the understanding that they will earn less than equivalent in-office employees. Commute time, transportation expenses, and any other incidentals make up the difference. It’s all made clear and transparent upfront.

If remaining remote limits an employee’s promotability for reasons of company need, this is also made clear.

We’re trying, but you can’t reason with hate-fueled chaos. They’ll die off eventually and history won’t paint them as the patriots they imagine themselves. Sanity will return, but it will take time.

Well put. They’re a dying breed and they know it. Principles are long out the window, now they just want to burn it down.

Now, it’s trying to stop fingerprinting (also called canvas fingerprinting), which first appeared in the digital zeitgeist a decade ago.

Can anyone with knowledge on this stuff share whether it’s too little, too late for many of us? Since data has been gathered in this way for up to a decade already, will this do any good?

If it existed, was proven safe, and was widely available enough for anyone to use, then of course.

The auto and airline industries would collapse, reducing pollution and global warming.

The biggest downside I can think of offhand is that everyone could vacation wherever they like, and that would quickly overcrowd and ruin all the nice places.

You give him too much credit, he didn’t write the song. In fact, he only wrote four songs from his ten albums, most recently in 2009. Like most of his country contemporaries he’s not an artist, just a pandering performer.

At one point they will serve as currency for a shrine quest. You will need 5 of them for this.

Yeah like fucking off to Cancun while his constituents froze without power and in many cases, water

Fahhhcking Tim. You mean this time, Tim?

Agreed. I’m a veteran,I had a lower security clearance, and I can attest that the sheer number of times the government warns about the consequences relating to classified materials is very high. There is no question that a military member handling things as Trump did would be locked away quickly and for the long haul.

Still I hold out hope that 45 will face the consequences he’s due without pardon. Otherwise it would be setting a dangerous precedent for national security, and I can’t think of anything the government holds more dearly than that. Letting 45 off the hook is effectively saying they value him more than national security, no?

And like the Alabama ruling, it doesn’t explain why the court nevertheless had issued emergency relief to allow Louisiana to use its unlawful maps during the 2022 midterm cycle," Vladeck added. "It puts the court’s interventions last year into ever-sharper perspective.

This stands out to me as the question begging for an answer. Surely the Supreme Court will explain itself, right? Right.