be_excellent_to_each_other

I was thinking urinalysis, which I was always told was ~30 days. It doesn’t change the argument.

C-level or anyone in the company exempt? Do we monitor alcohol usage so closely? Would people tolerate it if we did? Federal law is the only reasonable basis for an employer to be testing for off the clock use of a drug that is legal or decriminalized in that state. Otherwise it’s an invasion of privacy. And yes, it is, whether you tell me it legally is or not.

The moment there isn’t federal law to lean on, I hope for and expect court cases predicated on the fact that there’s no basis for an employer to care more about whether someone has smoked cannabis in the past thirty days than they do about whether that same employee gets blackout drunk every Friday and Saturday night - nor for that matter if the person responsibly drinks a couple beers after work some nights. (Or is someone pushing to detect alcohol use within the past 30 days as a reason to disqualify employment?)

Neither of those details of their lives speaks to someone’s sobriety at work, and the basis for considering marijuana usage as somehow “worse” is rooted directly in the racist basis for policies enacted at the very start of cannabis prohibition.

The reality is that drug tests just like felony checks are very good filters for bad employees.

If this is true, drug testing should start at the CEO.

Edit2: Hanging onto this for 2 months before replying, or just like trolling through old cannabis discussions looking for an argument, or…?

fwiw in the future you can find out the path to your drives and their uuid if needed with

lsblk -f

I didn’t realize that. That’s disheartening.

It’s hard for me to imagine 2024 not being the year they do.

I mean the physical design of the gun, not the projectile or effect.

I’m a simple man. Same answer for decades.

Someone somewhere is already planning how they will get people to work around the clock this way, and someone else somewhere is probably desperate enough to feed themselves or their family that they’ll take it when offered.

Yeah, I’d think outside of movie-style moments it’s not something that makes sense 99.9% of the time, I just thought it was an interesting claim. It would have been more interesting if it were true. 😁

(to be clear I’m not the guy who made the claim)

I did find a great many links to articles about this one event, but so far nothing to support that they do it regularly.

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/world-news/finland-stabbing-suspect-shot-in-leg

OK. I’m not claiming google isn’t trying. I’m claiming it doesn’t matter, and this is a solvable problem for end users. Most others in this thread are saying just FF and ublock does it, so I probably have overkill going on.

I only know this is happening with Youtube recently because of seeing other people talk about it.

FWIW, with Firefox on Linux with pihole on my network and ublock origin, some component (or the mix) of those things seems to have meant that so far I have yet to experience a single one of the things Google has been doing since the adblock wars began again. I just checked now to see if there was any delay, and there is not.

I haven’t seen a single popup, nor a single warning, no slowdowns, and no ads. I installed freetube in preparation for getting screwed, and although I like it, ad-wise and speed-wise it’s no different than hitting youtube directly.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Well fuck all those artists and writers who made the original works then I guess. Licensing is impractical.

Plasma 5 made me a KDE user and fanboy. I am super excited to see what 6 will bring.

KDE team, you rock.

So then we as a society aren’t ready to untangle the mess of our infancy in the digital age. ChatGPT isn’t something we must have at all costs, it’s something we should have when we can deploy it while still respecting the rights of people who have made the content being used to train it.

The reinstatement came after notable users such as George Galloway, a former member of the British Parliament, called out Musk for banning the accounts.

(Update at the top of the article)

Sorry, my joke generating subroutine has not been updated since the time that the rocket scientist idiom you mention was popularized.

😁

But the idiom isn’t “it’s not AI” it’s “it’s not rocket science.” 😉😁

Maybe the smartest people in the room are the ones we least expect.

I mean, they are a bunch of rocket scientists. That’s the group everyone has expected to be the smartest people in the room for about a century. 😁

Are we allowed to say he’s gone mask off yet?

From a capitalist perspective it’s ideal if your workers are on the verge of poverty, living paycheck to paycheck. That’s exactly where you want them.

People in that situation won’t complain. Won’t stand up for themselves or their rights. Will take poor treatment and deal with it. Will work in unethical or even illegal ways and keep quiet because they have no choice.

Even better if you can tie people’s health insurance to their job, then you’ve really got them by the balls.

I’ve got a pretty decent job, and earn pretty good money. But I’m the only earner in a family of four and no, we haven’t made all the best financial decisions at times.

What you have described is exactly where we live, and while there isn’t that much I want to stand up to at work in the first place, 100% I don’t make any waves that don’t have a basis in the hard facts of my job, and for this very reason. I’d like to go in an ask for a merit based raise, I’d like to fight harder for more people to be hired in our (spread very thin) department, and there are a few other things I’d like to at least ask for and feel OK about standing firm on.

But I don’t, because I don’t want to jeopardize what I’ve got.