I'm not against all those cameras, nor am I rejecting evolution. I just think that traditional mirrors are doing the job well enough for this to be a question now.
I've never driven one without regular mirrors, which is the point here. I'm not saying that it's not a nice extra to have, but it shouldn't replace anything.
I feel that this is an odd way to deal with the problem. What about trying to fight age-based discrimination, among many other types of discrimination all-together? That's what they should be trying to change, not coming up with yet another way to easily commit frauds in so many different fields.
My only question is: why? I mean, those are going to be so much more expensive to produce, less reliable and harder to replace. There are some upsides regarding overall visibility, but I think that it's one of those cases in which the ups don't make up for the downs.
It sounded sketchy from the moment they asked for a pin code that they sent to your phone. It's easier to talk from the outside, but that should always be a red flag. What exactly would they be confirming by sending a PIN to the same number they were already contacting?
But that's a great heads up. Phishing is not just about obviously fake e-mails to hotmail accounts.
There are proved benefits of using PWAs in specific situations, but it's not near the wonderland that companies like Google are making it seem.
I believe that they have secured a place in mobile development and are very worth considering at this point, but it's very soon to say they're a good solution for everyone.
Imaginary Cloud | Web Developer / Web Designer | Lisbon, Portugal | Full-time | ONSITE
Imaginary Cloud is a successful and fast growing company, working to design and develop cutting-edge web and mobile products.
We are looking for a Web Developer who is highly driven to push their technical knowledge to the very edge, and a Web Designer who is passionate about designing remarkable products.
I just can't trust it when an instrumental song by a band
that I can't find anywhere else kicks in. I'm not saying that Discover Weekly can't provide you great artists that you don't know, but I can't trust it. It leaves me with the sense that I've been tricked and I'd rather avoid it all together.
They are not making money from Discover Weekly, but they make money from made-up artists, since they don't have to pay anyone to have that music up there. It's easy to do the math from there.
The work they have in making a few artists up is nothing compared to what they would have to pay for an actual artist to have their albuns there.
This is why I refuse to play the Discover Weekly playlist. I strongly believe that Spotify is getting money out of made up artists, with songs put up by algorithms in some way, and that's the best way to get them to you.
Regarding the 'hacking', it never happened to me, but it's easy to see how troublesome that may be. But that's what we get for trusting an application that promises to get us free music forever. It had to have drawbacks, eventually.
Isn't it possible to rig Glassdoor by using multiple accounts? It may be harder to achieve in huge corporations, but for small companies, it's way too easy to make the bad reviews seem meaningless.
In any case, it's easy to spot when a review isn't honest, good or bad. They often seem scripted, pointing out some bad aspects that aren't really bad, and highlighting the same upsides over and over again.
It's just a question of filtering those and getting to what really matters. As for the companies that are forcing employers to write good reviews... how can they be sure of which review was done by who? Can't they just give a bad review instead when asked? I can see that backfiring really quick.
I sure could use this 25 years ago to impress the whole school... However, I hardly can see how some of them get to fly straight, but I think that it's a question of trying it out myself.