This seems like a potentially stupid question, but the link only shows how to do it on an android device. The terms sprung up on me in the iOS app (I have yet to update it) and thankfully I found the hidden toggle button. There does not seem to be an equivalent way to turn off the sharing of data on my iOS device, so if anyone has found a way, please tell me about it.
I think that coursera is moving away from quizzes with feedback. I'm currently doing the ML course by Andrew Ng and the quizzes do not have feedback when you answered correctly or incorrectly. The archived ML course (with the old coursera interface) still shows the feedback for quizzes.
Thank you so much for this! The way Uber cherry picks the laws in the countries or even US states just disgusts me to no end. It would indeed be a scary future if multinational corporations get to infringe on countries' sovereign rights.
YES thanks for this! I've seen too many people justify something that could be considered immoral by invoking this "but it satisfies user needs" pseudo-argument.
I believe this is not a very fair comparison to connecting things to the Internet. When people in the 90s question whether they needed a phone all the time, they were questioning the usefulness of doing so. In contrast, connecting things to the Internet exposes the user to an additional vector of attack and exploitation (crappy or non-existent security from manufacturers, adtech companies selling your data etc). So the question changes from "what convenience is there" to "why would you put yourself to such a risk?"
How about you calm down instead of spewing nothing but toxic comments at almost every single reply this post has? I fail to see how OP is in any sense blackmailing his boss. All he is doing is asking for a pay raise. Regarding your point about making his boss look bad, may I remind you that never has once did the OP mention the name of his boss or the place he works at? If OP really wanted to make his boss look bad, would he have gone through the trouble of hiding his identity?
I take great offense at "try to understand why your boss only wanted to give you $45k and work on yourself". You're pushing the blame squarely on the OP. He has clarified that this salary is even LOWER than his intern pay. Now, wouldn't it be more reasonable to ask the boss why the pay is even lower than his previous salary?
You have made yourself look like the very kind of obnoxious boss that OP is talking about.
The title would be better if it were "Uber has defeated Bill de Blasio's plan to block them from doing business". I think we really need to fight the notion that Uber promotes "ride sharing", whatever that even means now. Uber has shown that its service is anything but sharing - it is plain old taxi with a spiffy app and no labour protection, and where their "employees" are merely treated as another replaceable contractor. The media also needs to stop quoting meaningless buzzwords like "sharing", but I guess this goes to show the successful PR of Uber.
Forgive me if I sound ignorant of America's laws because I'm not from this country, but I'm really puzzled as to why Uber is able to continue to operating in the country. Why is Uber exempt from all the taxi laws that are currently in place in the states, able to make itself sound like a legitimate business despite breaking regulations everywhere? Feels to me as if you can justify breaking regulations by "satisfying customer demands". I'm really curious.
> You are justifying executing someone based on whether or not they broke a state law, not on whether or not they broke a moral law.
What are these moral laws you speak of? Your opinions on what is right and what is wrong?
The cases you present for firearm possession is simply a case of false dichotomy. Firearm possession is not inherently immoral. The armies of the country would definitely need them to protect the country against others, especially for Singapore who is surrounded by hostile neighbours.
Citizen ownership of firearms, on the other hand, is a highly impractical thing. It is illegal to own firearms in the country and that is just how the laws of the countries were set up in the first place. I would not go as far as to say that owning them is immoral, but by intentionally breaking the laws of the country, what are you trying to imply?