I get the idea that the final ethics code will be ‘Republican Aligned Justices can do what ever they want, Democratic Aligned Justices can be impeached for disagreeing with anything.’
Well that’s the way republicans in congress already act, of Thomas would have been impeached and removed already. The ethics rules are just for internal discipline rules at SCOTUS.
“We’re TOTALLY going to start policing ourselves one day. Just you wait and see. When? This year isn’t good we have an election coming up and we need to make sure the American people can weigh in on this very important matter [so we can see if Republicans will overthrow democracy and we can move on from this without change. Clarence’s mom ain’t paying rent and I got “baseball tickets” ill need another “small” loan for…].”
They're going to be concrete steps by which they can investigate and clear themselves out and wrongdoing, before they head out on vacation with their billionaire "friends".
Agreed, but only if it can happen before the orange shit-stain has a chance to run next year. If his name is put on the ballot, then removed due to disqualification (for insurance), the flurry of fat-ass, mouth breathing troglodytes with gun fetishes will be deafening spitting conspiracy theories and refusing, even more, to ignore the election results and turn the whole process into even more of a headache.
I fucking hate this country. Government supporting one side while idiot civilians do all they can to help the other. It’s not a war crime, but I feel like it should be treason.
Well, the US is involved in the war, even if indirectly, and considers Ukraine a strategic partner, so one could say he’s acting against the interests of the US.
“Consistent starting pay results in consistent staffing and better customer service while also creating new opportunities for associates to gain new skills from experience across the store and lay the groundwork for their career regardless of where they start,”
Ok miss PR person. Please explain your rationale cause that shit makes no sense.
I worked somewhere that was killing off their QA department and in a company wide meeting explained it by saying “when you go to a store a pick up a part, you expect it to have gone through QA” Lots of head scratching that day. They still don’t QA their products. They just ship them and let the customers complain if something is wrong.
Reminds me when we had three companies merging at the same time and the bosses brought everyone in to tell the grunts and sales people that no one will be losing jobs. I ask, “You know when you move in with someone and you have to get rid of a set of dishes. Do you think you need three sets of dishes?” Yeah, so there were tons of lay offs.
Why even lie about it. Anyone smart enough to be worth something at the company is also smart enough to know better. You’ll lose everyone you can’t afford to lose.
I’ve seen this happen too. It’s sort of a double edged sword - devs need to take testing seriously and have coverage metrics. However, this doesn’t negate the need for QA particularly in software that has a human experience associated with it. Writing code and having it work correctly doesn’t mean that the user experience itself will be correct. For whatever reason, executives don’t understand this and software gets shipped with more bugs than ever because there’s little to no QA.
Yeah. We wrote unit tests and integration tests, but we needed ui tests, which none of us were strong in at the time. One bug I remember fondly, it was possible to abuse debounce basically to submit bad info by switching an input after hitting submit. This happened more than you would expect. Took us forever to figure it out till we were able to get a UI tester from another team to figure it out. The human element is super useful in testing
Not for my old app that had to be audited 6 times a year lol. Any data defect had to be explained in a one page summary. Now imagine you regularly have ~30k concurrent users. The wrong bug means tons of paperwork that brings us all out of development mode to write and support.
probably went something like this: someone at a low paying store complained about the store 4 miles down the road paying more. so they're addressing that 'issue'.
Can't imagine a world where anything they come up with has any bite or actually correct any of the ongoing problems. The number of cases where justices should've recused themselves for conflicts of interests seems to just keep growing.
Oh quit being so obtuse. They only generated 143 billion dollars in profit last year. How can they be expected to pay their employees a living wage like that??
After all, if they took 140 of that billion and divided it among their 2.1 million global retail employees, that’d only be 66,666 each with a 1.4 million left over. Hardly worth doing, obviously. After all, what will the shareholders say??
I’m not saying you aren’t right, but maybe we should just financially decapitate them? That way we aren’t killing people wholesale and then we can send a message as well as distribute some wealth with sanity bereft of toxic capitalism.
Maybe a flat tax rate with no deductions for business or corporate income, no personal income tax, top paid income tied to the lowest paid, and 90% of backend profits distributed to employees based on a percentage of payroll expense for the fiscal year?
I mean it might take a falling blade to get there, but the best omelettes need a few broken eggs.
Hi there! Looks like you linked to a Lemmy community using a URL instead of its name, which doesn’t work well for people on different instances. Try fixing it like this: !foreigntvshows
news
Newest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.