ebrenes

So, you're reinforcing their point that the producers can take actions to attempt to address the problem. Actions which Sony has not undertaken in this instance.

I don't live in New York City, but when I was there Uber was the absolute best option for our use case, because they were the only option that allowed us to ask for a toddler carseat as an extra. It was a game changer and preferred that over taxis and other car services.

I also remember a period in time when I could use Trillian to connect to ICQ, MSM, AIM and have it all in one convenient chat client without having to fire up all the individual ones. Granted it sometimes broke when the protocols updated, but for a moment it was pretty cool.

That no one remembers what it's like having an office is the system working as intended. The open office layout is meant to reduce costs as it's cheaper to cram more people in fewer square meters of physical space. It's also cheaper to reorganize teams/furniture in an open office layout.

Plus, it allows managers to look over their demesne unimpeded.

That's really regressive. My sister-in-law works for HPE and she instead got a work from home bonus added to her paycheck. Instead of having companies offload their costs to employees like some late-stage capitalist dystopia they should compensate employees for providing the infrastructure themselves.

In some jurisdictions this is actually required, if the company is to expect any level of service or availability from infrastructure on the employer's home. For example, if your personal internet fails you cannot be held liable or at fault by an employer, since they're not paying for that. And if they pay for it, then it's on them to fix it since it's the service they provided (just like it's not an employee's fault if the internet gets cut at the office).

I wouldn't go that far. The feeling I'm getting from their responses are of someone that appreciates the nuance and details of social interactions. As someone who lacks that detailed appreciation, this stood out for me.

It was like reading an audiophile describe what I previously thought were a perfectly serviceable set of headphones in less than stellar terms, while realizing they're probably right, but still cognizant that those short-comings did not affect my use of those headphones, in particular.

In which case, it wouldn't be done through a drop of blood, as Theranos advertised. It will be done through those undiscovered "magical" means (in the sufficiently advanced levels of technology are akin to magic manner of speaking) that currently elude our understanding both technical and theoretical.

Yet such information is incredibly lacking and hard to find. You would think the Vatican and similar would have all this information ready to be digested by people interested in learning, yet it's incredibly hard to find if it's available.

That worked really well with the beached whale!

If a person were so concerned about not being a Trump supported, like you mentioned they could have abstained or voted for some other person that's not Trump. At the end, voting for Trump is support for Trump no matter what convoluted logic was used to arrive at that decision.

Another factor is that the black people that were mainly affected by the segregation were the primary funders of the bus system. Their boycott was incredibly significant to the bottom line.

Read the article completely or the comments. Your question has been addressed multiple times in this thread.

Which is really all that most countries are doing. In doing so also they're buying time by decreasing the number of people that get infected per unit of time, thus increasing the likelihood that more people will be infected later when possibly better treatment options exist and/or a vaccine.

But every metric used by colleges is to measure what you termed "scholastic actuality":

- School grades: if you didn't get the GPA you're already out of the running in many colleges

- Extracurricular Activities: if you didn't actually participate, then no one is going to look at how you might have done if you had participated

- College Essay: if you can't write you're not going to get any points here, no matter the potential you might have to eventually write something amazing

I don't see why the SAT should focus on some ethereal "potential" when everything else is centered on the current reality and not potential. Colleges aren't looking for the completely unrefined ore, they're looking for a diamond in the rough that needs to be cut and polished if you will. Not a bucket of rocks that are very likely to contain a diamond.