I had an employee review with my manager this week, at my request. She told me she wasn’t comfortable uptraining me right now even though they badly need the help in the position I asked to be crosstrained for, because they’d rather hire someone just for the role; but we could talk about it again in two months. After a little digging, I found that (A) they can’t afford to lose me from my lower-paid role and (2) they know I’m looking for another job and don’t want to train me until I demonstrate I’m planning to stay.
My response is that (A) well you’re definitely gonna lose me now and (2) I’m definitely no longer willing to stay.
If they communicated better, and offered the training/position/salary increase as incentive to stay, that would (imo) be a better course of action. This just feels rude and incompetent
Well I mean I am awful with people, but this problem even I could solve. They had about 3 possible holes to fit the peg through, but no, they just threw the toybox out of the window.
MAYBE OP is just awful at their job. But if they wanted to keep him where he was, that makes little sense.
Additional info: I typically work the least desirable shifts because of family obligations. Me leaving this position or even dropping to part time would leave a hole in the schedule, and she’s very lazy when it comes to the schedule. I’m offering to take the same shift in a different role.
Somewhat related, advice about being irreplaceable is bad for this exact reason. The more replaceable you are, the easier to promote you and take longer vacations. Sure you might be able to get fired more easily, but most managers won’t put forth the effort.
Not trying to be an asshole, but this is privilege in action. For low paying jobs, managers will fire you at the drop of a hat. Jobs that pay better are more secure.
I asked questions during the review. My.manager was evasive but it wasn’t hard to put together. In the restaurant industry, everyone is hiring right now as they expand for patio season. That won’t be the case as much in two months and we both know it; if I’m going to leave it’ll likely be in the next two weeks.
I remember doing self assessments before reviews, I just gave myself 5s because they were going to change everything to 3.5 anyhow unless you invented cold fusion and sucked everyone’s dick
Well, Mr Chalupapocalypse, your breakthrough on cold fusion is really profitable for the company, but the VP of marketing was disappointed you didn’t cup his balls during last week’s blowjob session, so…best we can do is a 3.9
Similar situation on my end awhile back. Location had begun losing people. I was in a bottom rung management position, more title than authority, and the team knew it. However, I was also the only manager willing to be consistently on later shifts. Due to pretty intense compartmentalization issues were often isolated and fixed by managers within each department. Except later on at night I was alone with a smaller team. This presented a bit of a situation:
If a problem came up I was expected to text or call a manager. As you can imagine, they did not often reply or pick up.
Many problems require rather immediate solutions.
I wasn’t being trained to receive the skills necessary to deal with many situations so I began enabling key members of the evening team and standing in front of them if mistakes were made, acting as a wall.
Due to all of this, and a lot of work being handled by a smaller team, (and some issues going consistently ignored by senior management) we saw several people leave. In the middle of all this I was isolated and made out to be the reason for some systemic issues, told I could no longer take the initiative to help, and the team caught wind.
Eventually I began looking for other jobs. When I let my bosses know boy were they surprised. By the time I left one manager had claimed to have started having anxiety attacks during their shift, the whole unreachable during situations thing became a problem for upper, and well…long story short shit and fan began to meet.
If a problem came up I was expected to text or call a manager. As you can imagine, they did not often reply or pick up.
Many problems require rather immediate solutions.
These are not your problems. If management has enacted a procedure that doesn’t work, don’t change it or you will be blamed for any failure.
Send a few emails to document your opinion that there are problems. Otherwise, do exactly what was recommended. You want the policy to fail. Don’t try to improve it without management support.
I learned this in my previous job. We were a city-owned theater, which came with all of the trappings of government bureaucracy. But we were also open after hours, and did a lot of technical work for our shows. The city’s IT would log off on Friday at 5pm, and not log back in again until 8am on Monday. We were one of the few departments that was open over the weekend and after hours, (often until 1 or 2am when loading shows out.)
So naturally, we butted heads with IT a lot. Because we didn’t have access to change things we often needed to change. Whenever we needed to urgently troubleshoot something before a show started, our hands were almost always tied by IT. And IT’s given solution was always the same. Submit a ticket, and we’ll get to it when we get to it. But when you have 2000 people waiting on a show to start at 7pm on a Saturday, you can’t wait for IT to get back into the office on Monday.
Historically, the solution was to use our own gear. Every technician had their own personal laptop, so they could use that instead of the city laptop. But this caused issues of its own, because we couldn’t connect to any of the city-controlled gear as the city network was MAC filtered, (and IT obviously wasn’t going to allow our personal devices to connect to their network.) We worked with what we had, worked around problems we couldn’t fix, and it was a lot of extra stress for no extra benefit; The higher-ups didn’t see a problem because the shows were never visibly impacted. And IT didn’t see a problem, because the higher-ups weren’t complaining.
Eventually, we just started letting it burn. Shows suddenly started 15 to 30 minutes late, (which was unheard of in a building where even 2 minutes late was considered unacceptable.) Clients didn’t get equipment they had paid for, because it was broken on Friday evening and we couldn’t troubleshoot it over the weekend. Projectors didn’t have video feeds, because techs stopped using their personal laptops for shows. Et cetera, et cetera. Instead, the techs simply started noting every time they wanted to fix something but couldn’t because their hands were tied.
And wouldn’t you know it, the system got fixed. IT was suddenly required to keep someone on call for weekend tickets. Because when people stop propping up the broken system, all of the flaws get discovered and heads roll until shit gets fixed.
“Jill, I’m afraid we have a problem. Your quality of work is very high, as always. But you don’t look enough like your job isn’t soul crushing. I’m not saying you look like you’re bored out of your mind or that I think working here is depriving you of your will to live. I’m just saying that there are times when you’re not smiling like a completely unhinged person and that makes me question whether you really want to be here.”
Reminds me of my art professor’s story about getting her doctorate, in which a bunch of tenured professors came together to review her work to give her the degree. One professor disagreed with giving her doctorate because apparently she didn’t look like she had a tough time getting it. That sent my art professor over the edge because she’d worked so hard and suffered so much for it so she started crying in front of the professors and told them she wasn’t going to bother getting her doctorate anymore and that she was quitting right there and then. The other tenured professors were quick to convince the other to change their mind and eventually gave the degree, but my art professor still remembers how shitty it was to decide something so important to her on the basis that she suffered much less than her peers in producing something good or better work.
— “we don’t like people ripping off our work without any added value”
— “Here, let me push this to your staging environment, totally breaking your quality process”
— “No”
— “Well, what the hell do you want broo?”
I don’t think they have ever hidden the fact this is about money. I don’t like the fact this is about money, but the fact that others were cloning and selling their efforts for a cheaper price is awful.
they are not breaking any law. This is totally allowed. You can use FOSS to create a commercial product.
they are major contributors to the Linux space. And they’ll keep contributing.
It’s their effort, they created a business around it, and it cycles back to push Linux forward.
this isn’t even going to affect average users. This is going to take money from companies that probably have the money to pay. For other companies, there are other distributions available.
Well, the re-builders would be breaking the law now that the source code isn’t available for non-paying customers. They weren’t breaking the law before.
So, do you expect every company to release the source code of their products just because they used a FOSS web framework or a FOSS programming language like Python? Or by the same logic, for companies to release the source code of their products if their developers use Linux in their development machines? Or if they use Linux to deploy their applications in the cloud? That’s such an unreasonable position.
OK, so is Redhat breaking any license? Do you really think a company like Redhat would open itself to thousands of lawsuits like that. The CEO already explained that this is totally legal and covered by GPL. They are in fact distributing the source to the people receiving the product. This is exactly what GPL says. They are not forced to open the source code to people who aren’t getting the distributed software.
What is your complaint then? They are not breaking any law and they are following the GPL license.
I was using the webframework/language as examples because you said this wasn’t a matter of law but a matter of principle. So why does the principle apply to Redhat but not the million other products that totally depend on FOSS on their core?
So many projects do in fact distribute the FOSS, but they use more permissive licenses like MIT, Apache or LGPL. BUT you’re saying the law is not relevant, what matters is the principle. So why don’t everyone release their code if they depend on FOSS on their core products? Because they aren’t breaking the Apache or MIT licenses? Well, that’s great! Redhar isn’t breaking the GPL license either. Why must Redhat follow whatever subjective principles you have?
— “hey there’s this company creating a commercial product around FOSS. They aren’t breaking any license.”
— “Nice, as long as the licenses aren’t compromised”
Its funny how podcasters and commenters seem to have taken Redhat’s spin about “contributing value to the community” seriously, while to the rest of us the whole thing was obviously only about money (same as all the follow-ups from other parties… I would say “including Alma” but that would probably deserve its separate debate).
Red Hat saying that argument in-particular shows they’ve pivoted their philosophy significantly, it’s a seemingly subtle change but is huge - presumably due to the IBM acquisition, but maybe due to the pressures in the market right now.
It’s the classic argument against FOSS, which Red Hat themselves have argued against for decades and as an organisation proved that you can build a viable business on the back of FOSS whilst also contributing to it, and that there was indirect value in having others use your work. Only time will tell, but the stage is set for Red Hat to cultivate a different relationship with FOSS and move more into proprietary code.
Nothing’s average to you when you’ve barely listened to anything. Many of us started their musical journey with bands we don’t enjoy anymore because we now know better ones.
Google photos and apple have been doing it for years too, they’re like we found this person 50 times in your photo collection, why don’t you name them?
Amazon asked me to use their photos app to get a $20 gift certificate last week. I uploaded one photo, got the bonus money, deleted the app and used it to help buy a new monitor.
Quick guess from me would be permission to use the camera(s) and if they have some kind of file picker or gallery, permission to access all media files from your phone (and older versions of Android did not have this "media"distinction, so they would give access to all user files (excluding sandboxed paths)
You have to manually approve of giving each permission on Android, and camera and files/images are separate permissions (so giving access to the camera doesn’t require giving access to your files). And you can make it so they only have access to it while you use the app. If you take a random picture and then uninstall, they get nothing except that random picture.
It even has the same kind of AI object and face recognition as in Google Photos, but it’s your own cloud setup and self-hosted software, so all of the data is entirely yours and nobody else’s. It’s downright strange to think of those things as actual features and not privacy violations.
Yeah it really bothers me that they’re not asking you to compromise only your data, they want you to give them info on your friends/family too (who obviously didn’t agree to the terms and conditions). Thanks for shouting out an alternative.
I don’t. Corps gonna corp, if they can. But I’ve checked this using all the development, networking, and energy monitoring tools at my disposal and apple’s e2e and on-device guarantee does appear to hold. For now.
Still, those who can should audit periodically, even if they’re only doing it for the settlement.
No like actually though. I do not have the energy to do that (for many reasons that both are and are not my own fault). Thank you for spending your energy on something that is also helpful to me that I don’t have the energy for.
They’ve been doing ML locally on devices for like a decade. Since way before all the AI hype. They’ve had dedicated ML inference cores in their chips for a long time too which helps the battery life situation.
It's really important for folks to understand what is being talked about here, because I run into folks even here that are like "that's a wall of text, I'm not reading that". And that's kind of the behavior that's being talked about. Like, if you find yourself in "read the headline, not the story" you might be in this group they are talking about in this article that is linked. And do not let me come off high and mighty here, I absolutely have issues with this some times because I get all kinds of caught up with life and do not have enough time to maintain my reading habits. It is a complex issue on why there is this deterioration of reading skills. And I will likely say something to the effect of "Internet BAD!" but do know it is more than just that, it is just that is the easiest go-to for a "short" comment.
So that said. Nice little sample question one would see on a test that would test this is:
In Lions of Little Rock, two girls form a dangerous and clandestine friendship, that is challenged by racial segregation. Name, in chronological order, the multiple episodes of racist threats and violence and how they increased the tension of the relationship between the two girls.
It's not a question of "Can you read the book?" It is a question of, "Did you extract information from the book? Can you connect the dots asked in the question based on the information that you read?" Lots of people who identify themselves as literate have a lot of difficulty doing these kinds of things. So we have to understand that, this is not testing if a kid can read the word "onomatopoeia", it is testing if a person can extract useful information from written words.
All of that is different from the "eighth grade reading level" where you are typically asked things like "extrapolate what you think the underlying theme the author is trying to present." Sixth grade reading is mostly being able to put things back in the order that you read them, picking out the descriptive terms that were in the text, and identifying what the entire point was for this particular piece of work, among other things. One does not have to really get creative here, sixth grade reading is just "in slightly finer detail" being able to regurgitate what was just read. Now to get kids ready for higher reading, there is usually questions about "do you think this person at this point was feeling happy?" That kind of stuff that relies of extrapolating meaning which is usually above the "sixth grade level reading".
And it is indeed shocking how many people cannot do this. But in order to be shocked, I think people need to understand what is being tested here. A lot of social media does indeed condition folks to allow this level of reading to atrophy. The number of people who toss around TL;DR is really high and some of that is because it does not interest them. That of course is fine, but some of it is because 50% of the way through their brain is tired of reading text. AND THAT, is problematic. And really I can only touch on so much of the issue in this comment without it feeling like it is going on forever.
There are all kinds of assessment tests online that folks can review and see exactly the kind of questions that are being asked. The whence and wherefores on this matter and the causes for it happening are indeed complex and obviously I cannot cover them all here. But one big one, in my opinion, is education and its intersection with technology. Technology does indeed make lots of things easier for us, but some of those things that technology unburdens us from we should probably reexamine that relationship. Perhaps we need better education with technology or maybe we need less technology with that education, they both have pros and cons to them. There are not easy answers in this for the kind of background American education presents, which that is also an addressable matter in all of this.
but some of it is because 50% of the way through their brain is tired of reading text. AND THAT, is problematic.
Yep.
This reminds me of how often people mistake skill for “natural talent”.
“Natural talent” exists, but someone without any particular natural talent who still has spent thousands of hours doing a thing is going to run circles around someone with “natural talent” who never put time and effort into practicing.
And I think when that skill is “reading”, people don’t power through the moments when their brain rebels, gets frustrated, or gets tired. So they hit that block, and don’t push through to overcome it. They go do something else…but they go do something else every single time. So a block that would be frustrating but minor in the big scheme of things gets codified in one’s mental image of themselves.
And once you have this idea that you are or are not something–that conception can turn into a huge mountain to overcome.
(As an aside, our parents have huge influence on if we think we “are” or “are not” something. It’s very worth it when you think you “can’t” do something to go back and look at your life and check if that voice in your head is yours, or if it’s the internalized voice of a parent who didn’t know what the fuck they were talking about!)
(Both people who were belittled as “stupid” and those who were constantly called “smart” can end up kinda “malfunctioning” later on, thinking they can’t do something. The ones called stupid think they can’t do something because “they’re dumb”, while the one called smart has been conditioned to fear not being 100% perfect, so they don’t even start because minor, genuinely trivial failures loom as large as the destruction of the entire earth in their minds!)
I definitely feel that, especially when you see people define themselves as “readers” or “not readers”. There’s no way that there isn’t a book out there for every person, but we aren’t always great at connecting kids with what actually motivates them to read and reflect. The Grapes of Wrath is an incredible and ever-relevant book, but there’s no way I could’ve appreciated it as such in high school. I know the same is true for many others because it was notorious for being a drag at my school. It just takes time to develop the critical reading skills and life experience that make you appreciate something like that, and not everyone has that by 6th grade or even graduation. I just don’t know how you go about continuing that education.
The other thing that needs to be acknowledged here is that literacy has overwhelming been trending upwards over time. As grim as this is, it’s actually fantastic news when we look at where we used to be.
I’m not convinced that social media causes a loss of reading skills. I suppose it is possible but I would want to see some studies on the topic. Anecdotally, I do find myself reading less than I used to. I took a number of English lit classes as electives purely for fun and enjoyed reading a number of fun works that I think would hopefully qualify me as reading above a 6th grade level. But that was many years ago. I haven’t done a lot of reading in the last decade except for news articles about everything going to hell. Of the few books I have read, I read them for pleasure and each was lightweight, not too much analysis and explication required, one rather challenging history book about the lead up to the first world war notwithstanding, though it’s difficulty is due more to more complex sentence structure and arcane vocabulary, and less to its erudite discussion of an already complex topic. Nevertheless, I don’t believe I have had any difficulties demonstrating far beyond mere functional literacy you described despite my infrequent reading of anything longer than a news article or Reddit post. Still, this is anecdotal and so I would be interested to see if any scientific evidence exists to connect a loss of reading skills with disuse and to what degree those skills are diminished.
I tried looking for any studies on this, and all I can find is info on kids. Nothing in adults, except one study that found cognitive benefits to older adults who used social media.
I think you make some valid points. I like to imagine most of us have other interests and projects we are engaged with and my be less motivated in some areas when we engage with other things. This is almost always the cause if my headline hot take behavior or unwillingness to read a text wall. I’m primarily here for the inadequate dopamine hit of social media; not as much for the personal growth potential.
I think the primary issue is an education system that makes reading and learning a nuisance and chore. This is a problem that can be solved in the coming decade with the use of technology, but it will take a serious overhaul of the entire system. There is no room for proprietary software and exploitation in education. The entire system should be standardised on open source software, funding should be allocated to run a small independent and offline AI server and the teacher’s role should be divided between the AI system and a traditional group oriented role. This will allow individualized education without exploitation. An AI agent that is specifically designed for this task and paired with the teacher’s supervision makes it possible for each child to follow the path that best suits them. They can read any book they want that meets certain requirements. They can progress at their own pace. Issues can be identified long before any current teacher is capable of spotting. Most importantly, this is not about AI as a product or replacing the teacher in any way. This is making use of a tool, and doing so ethically. This kind of thing can not be done for profit or by contractors. The privacy of such a system should be of paramount importance that is not possible long term with any company focused on profitability. The only people with access to the AI should be the students, parents, and teachers. Even IT staff at the school should not have access to the AI logs and data, and there should be no persistent storage long term. It has to be a tool that is used by the teacher only.
To be clear, I am a hobbyist working on such a tool for my own self education with the computer science curriculum. This is about AI agents. This is not about a raw AI LLM. An agent is a collection of LLMs connected through a code base, and connected to databases. This does not rely on the model training alone for answers. This is a system where the final answer is checked and reviewed multiple times and verified against accurate sources before a final reply is made. Most people here are likely unfamiliar with this and what it is capable of doing.
This is the inevitable future, it is only a question of how long it takes people to adapt to the new potential. This level of individualized education has only been available to the ultra rich, but it is now possible for everyone at scale.
I read your first paragraph then skipped the rest of whatever you’re going on about. It’s about saving your time in a world where there’s near infinite amount of content to be able to read, it’s a skill to know what’s worth reading.
I agree to some extent, but honestly the time spent on reading lemmy/reddit/Twitter/etc could almost certainly be spent on more important literature. I’m not going to pretend that a few minutes in a sea of wasted hours really makes a difference.
I read all of this. I am definitely guilty of looking for a TL;DR. I absolutely believe my overuse of technology has caused my reading and writing skills to deteriorate significantly and my memory as well. I struggle with remembering and analyzing. I have never been a good book learner though. I suspect I have a learning disability that wasn’t quite bad enough for intervention when I was in school aside from special reading training in grade two or three.
In the context of social media, this isn’t really the same problem of not wanting to or being able to read longer stuff in general. There are countless screeds from any number of sources that you wouldn’t want to waste your time going through (not saying the above poster is one of them), so getting a general sense of a longer post is an important skill.
Being able to work through edited prose in detail is also important, but remember that it’s very different from what we all encounter online. In the immortal words of someone who probably wasn’t Twain or Pascal, “I did not have time to write a shorter letter.”
A long time ago I reasoned that the poorest least educated of us would be functional illiterates for whom a separate glyph based language would be created. A smiley face does not require reading comprehension or analysis, nor does it produce a populace that asks questions.
I don’t think the landholders who run this shit want more than fifty percent literacy from the serfs who will be beholden to their grandchildren. Too many smart serfs would endanger their legacies, and too few would render the industrial collective serviced by their human capital uncompetitive.
The next few decades will be about them figuring out just how many smart motherfuckers they need, and how to keep those firecrackers too frightened to start a revolution. They’ll be minmaxing the hell out of us.
It's not a question of "Can you read the book?" It is a question of, "Did you extract information from the book? Can you connect the dots asked in the question based on the information that you read?" Lots of people who identify themselves as literate have a lot of difficulty doing these kinds of things.
I'm really sorry if this comes across as a TL;DR, but there's a name for that. I'm positive you already know, but for the benefit of those interested, it's called "functional illiteracy." And it's wild, still blows my mind to this day. Like, if you're functionally illiterate, that doesn't mean you don't know how to read...it means you can read but can't understand language written beyond the basic level. There are a lot of variables involved and I'm oversimplying a lot, but that's it in a nutshell. It's fucking terrifying, to be honest, especially because it's so widespread.
Read to your kids, folks! And talk to them about it afterwards!
I feel like I encounter this alot at work. Write an email describing the problem, asking for clarification or a decision, and get a response back that seemingly ignores what is being asked with a question that was already answered in the previous email.
To be fair, on here I will sometimes intentionally cherry pick a single asked question out of several asked, because I’m not at work, and nobody is going to question my performance if I don’t answer the question I don’t give a fuck about.
You’ve indirectly highlighted the biggest issue I have with referring to literacy as “x-grade reading levels”. Literacy skills stack on top of each other and, sometimes, in slightly different orders. Calling them by a grade level makes people associate these skills with certain educational levels in school when, in reality, you only learn these skills from repetition and growth. I wish there were (and maybe there are and I’m just not familiar with them) clearer distinctions for these types of skills that meant more than “x-grade” which is practically meaningless to most people and harmful for those struggling with reading and comprehension.
Well that sounds like semantics that you take exception with, on how particular educational groups define things. Your frustration is well founded but misplaced on me. Indeed all things build and in different orders for different people no doubt. However, in the context of educational reporting at the government level, these are the labels that are applied in the various reports. And as all things, those things roll down hill.
clearer distinctions for these types of skills that meant more than “x-grade”
There are, but politics being what they are, those labels are less meaningful labels to folks that arguably have the most power to change the course of things (that last part is strictly my opinion, sorry/not really sorry I injected it here). In short, I concur with your observation.
However, in the context of educational reporting at the government level, these are the labels that are applied in the various reports
Yes, but this is exactly my issue. And I don’t think it’s about semantics, per se, but rather more about usefulness. Educational reporting using these terms is great for that demographic but is entirely useless for the people upon which it’s reporting.
Combines these with reading standards for various grades, and the metric makes a lot of sense. To say someone reads at a 5th grade level means they are technically literate but struggle to find true meaning, subtle concepts, and likely have a limited vocabulary.
I’d just like to note for the record that your post wasn’t a wall of text. Not only does it have paragraphs, it is also well-structured in its information delivery and you use connectives well, constantly answering “why am I reading this sentence (or subordinate clause)” in the first couple of words. This is not only easy to do (if you’re used to it), it also takes enormous load off the reader by not having them divine erm “train of thought context”, and actually follows natural speech patterns. But it does require that your thoughts are organised, that you can write the whole thing in one go, or you will have to go back and massage everything down to size. Which brings me to
TL;DR
“I didn’t have time to write a short letter, so I wrote a long one instead”.
Or, differently put: Writing skills are actually just as if not even more atrocious across the board. Another reason for tl;drs are people who are paid by word count.
No, they are free to speak & have policies & put up little posters. At WalMart ~15 yrs ago we were made to watch an anti-union video & it basically amounted to assurances that we can trust MGMT with anything; they will be fair & do the right thing. Lol
Now I don’t know when it came about, think it’s relatively new, but if there’s a union trying to form & the company goes out of their way to “bust” it, the union is supposed to be automatically recognized. IIRC.
It’s not illegal; it’s free speech. In their own business. It is incorrect, it is false propaganda, but it’s free speech.
That said, Amazon especially has engaged in enough illegal or at very least highly highly questionable practices in attempts to avoided workers unionizing. Such as: they had an agreement with the city to speed up a stop light, so organizers working in the parking lot didn’t have free time to effectively talk to workers leaving.
You can get in serious trouble, fired, for talking about unionizing at work in their workplace. Their rules. But the parking lot is fair game. So…they tilted the board to favor them, even there.
Secret ballot elections are never held at the employer’s place of work, they are mailed to employees and then tallied at the NLRB office. That machine is something else entirely
It’s only illegal for them to lie. This fits in the very narrow gray area of what they’re allowed to say because technically it’s not untrue. No contract in the world guarantees anything will or will not happen. A contract gives you the ammunition to sue the person you entered into the agreement with, if that person (or corporation) violates the agreed upon terms. So a union contract still gives you leverage and power over a corporation, but technically it doesn’t guarantee the terms of the contract will happen.
Edit to clarify: I’m not suggesting the anti-union propaganda has any validity. Just that they get away with this because technically it’s not lying.
So basically they’re saying, “why would you join a union because even if you manage to negotiate good terms, you can’t trust that we will keep our word”?
No, you missed it. If there was a strike or an agreement couldn’t be reached, in that way, you are not paid by the company & there are no guarantees the union has the money, means to pay you in full or at all. In this (rare) instance, they are technically correct & not lying.
Since non-union workers already don’t have any pay guarantee, the only difference would be you have someone who is literally paid to act in your interest that you get to talk to instead of your corporate overlords. And all your fellow workers will stop production to guarantee that Amazon doesn’t get any work done until they agree to raise wages.
Absolutely! More recent memories are much easier to recall. In the hours leading up to the test you should be again reviewing the material. Exactly like you said, there have been many times when i got an answer right instead of wrong purely because i had just re-read that info again a few minutes before the test. This is especially true for a test that requires a lot of memorization.
Even with the faded coloring, that burger looks at least an order of magnitude more appealing than the last Whopper I’ve seen. Granted, it’s probably been 10 - 15 years since I’ve been to or eaten food from a Burger King, and things might’ve changed.
The community college near me had zip drives on the library computers. I bought one primarily so I could download Netscape there and bring it home because doing it that way was faster than using our dialup connection.
I’ve watched a company load up 2PB of data into a tape library, have them stack it full of bubblewrap, then roll it onto the back of a truck with the tires deflated for a softer ride, then driven across town to a new datacentre at 3am on a Sunday.
i.redd.it
Hot