Yes, that's the point — this thread was in response to someone acting like it's unfair for a company to decline warranty coverage for a stolen product. That seems perfectly reasonable to me: anyone buying stuff on a site like eBay needs to factor authenticity into their buying decisions.
(Here I'm reminded of a certain office manager in the 90s who “saved” a fortune on Microsoft licenses until it turned out that the floppies they got from some guy at a swap market had a virus & the resulting downtime cost them more than the savings.)
It is unfair though - a warranty covers a product being free from defects in materials and workmanship. The product being stolen happened _after_ it's manufacture, which is the thing that is actually being guaranteed.
What would be fair is a company refusing to repair/replace a counterfeit product, but (presumably, given the response) the stolen cards are genuine articles. Articles that people will inevitably purchase at around 150-300% MSRP in the current market. This is just EVGA leaving ardent supporters of the brand, enthusiasts willing to pay many multiples of what the product is worth, out to dry.
This concern should be purely between EVGA, the courier, their respective insurance agents, and local law enforcement. I'm honestly amazed it's even being mentioned by the company on a public forum.
You’re leaving out some key factors to think about: they aren’t going to take responsibility for problems caused by mistreatment while the thieves are moving it around (heat or vibration can take time to manifest), or the possibility of something being modified before the buyer gets it. A common scam in many industries is someone taking legitimate packaging and using it to sell counterfeit or returned/failed products at full price.
This is EVGA saying they don’t want their reputation and finances on the line for any of those things which can happen outside of their control, which seems reasonable.
More importantly, they’re also sending a message to potential thieves that this is not a good thing to repeat. Publicly warning buyers and preventing those cards from being treated as equally valuable as the legitimate ones threatens the profitability of stealing them. Given the high prices in the market currently, that seems like a good message.
If you only donated $50 to cancer research whereas your coworkers donated $200, would that give me the right to tweet that out to everyone? It's okay if I attempt to coerce you thru public shaming, right? Bullying is okay if it's for a good cause?
As for Dail's victim, you don't know whether he has or hasn't helped in his own way. This Dail guy wanted to coerce a coworker to do something that RISKS HIM GETTING FIRED. He said no to Dail; this doesn't mean he hadn't or wasn't willing to help.
I don't like FB and I hate Zuck's stance, but no company would allow someone like Dail to continue bullying coworkers and creating a hostile work environment. I wouldn't be surprised if he already had a list of prior complaints. HR doesn't usually fire people based on a first-time offense.
If you are ever in charge of fundraiser or are looking for people to join a worthwhile cause that you support, try to understand that you'll gain more allies if you're not shitting on & shaming people to do what you want.
Ooof. I'd hate to be around that guy if he was organizing a fundraiser. If he's passionate about a cause and notices that you didn't donate as much as he had hoped, does it give him the right to publicly shame you for it? It doesn't matter if it's for a good cause or not, that's 100% harassment.
His tweet wasn't meant to encourage ppl to join his cause, his tweet was targeted at one person and meant to solicit others to attack. I wouldn't be surprised if FB already had complaints about that Dail guy being abrasive and difficult to work with.
Nobody's going to spell it out. If you announce someone doesn't support <popular movement> as much as you'd expect them to on a public forum, that will likely cause backlash. In that case either you did it in purpose, or caused it by not thinking of consequences of your actions.
That seems to imply that all public disagreement about a popular or controversial movement is "public shaming" and thus that you would oppose all such discussion.
The difference here is the discussion/post itself is almost irrelevant. Anyone can do it. You just can't do it to a coworker without work-policy based consequences.
If you want to do public shaming and cause backlash, nobody can stop you.
Just like it is a mistake to project every instance of subtle, overt, or systemic racism on all white people but here we are, talking about privilege differences between classes in the first world while the third is pointing and laughing at our stupidity.
I've got a lot of respect to the ppl who work on OSS, especially the maintainers since they're in the trenches tending to a lot of the daily crap we often don't see.
There's actual video footage of HK police officers arresting a kid because he had a flashlight in his backpack. They deemed it as a "weapon". Right now, HKPD is going on a rampage and making up excuses to arrest anyone who is brazen enough to talk back at them. It's juvenile. Good luck to the police officers who think that they'll magically go back to their normal lives after this. After grossly mistreating so many ppl in the community they swore to protect, they should expect spit in their food.
Some flashlights can definitely be used as weapons. A Maglite to the clavical while holding the bulb end is a pretty sure fire way to break ones collar bone and otherwise incapacitate an assailant. One of the reasons I keep one in my car. I once had the use it as a deterrent in a road rage incident. Random guy got pissed at me for driving aggressively in a school (I was driving the speed limit and he tried to pull out in front of me from a parallel parking spot, I had to swerve to avoid him and he followed me until I got stopped by a red light.).
Anyways, this guy gets out of his car and starts aproaching my car, and I get out of my car with the flashlight. Guy was easily 80-100 lbs larger than me. He immediately stepped back and accused me of being offensive. I responded with: you honked at me, gave me the finger, got out of your car at a light to confront me. I'm being defensive. You also have a significant size advantage. You have a problem with how I drive? Follow me to the police department and I'll tell them what I witnessed. Come a step closer, and you're going to the hospital, most likely.
Guy got back in his car and didnt follow up on my offer to speak with the police.
Used properly, a Maglite can be a great personal defense weapon. Swing toward the clavical (the area where neck meats shoulders). Again, hold by the bulb end; the shape will naturally help hold itself in your hand and youve got 3 C cell batteries at the other end which give a bit of heft to a swing.
In the eyes of the law, the intent matters much more than whether you can actually use the “weapon” effectively, especially if it can be demonstrated that somebody with enough skill/experience (not necessarily the person being found in possession) can use the “weapon” effectively.
Also, in the case of something like AntiFa, even if you had something like a Maglite in a backpack, intent to use could easily be construed. Broad daylight, youve got a Maglite? To what end?
A flashlight depending on type and size can be deemed as weapon. If it is a small pocket size naturally that would not immediately categorised as a weapon. However, if the flashlight sized object is a lazer pointer then it possibly can be categorised as being a weapon not physical but a distanced weapon of harm. It depends on the output of the Lazer if it is within safety parameters and also the users intended use. If the user is a lecturer or consultant then it fails within reasonable use. I think the legal considerations law enforcement and legal professionals have to deal with is more complex.
Part of the reason Maglite is so popular with security guards is that it's a weapon that also doubles as a flashlight and thus becomes legal to carry around.
I would not use the word rampage. Taking a neutral stance on the current matter in Hong Kong, you can see the use of extreme force catapulting bricks and rocks at the law enforcement officer and is more clear cut. The Lazer Pointer incident highlights the grey area with actual weapons to cause harm and the intention of modification of objects as weapons to cause harm. Lazer pointers with the wattage 1-5w can damage your eyes with a 10sec exposure. However, it does not take a lot of skill to upgrade the Lazer emitter with soldering electronics to increase output higher to cause harm easier and longer distances. The Police didn’t make that aspect clear. In addition reasonable use would have a person purchase one but purchasing 10 seems to fall out of ordinary use.
Technically, yes what he said is unscientific in the sense that he didn't conduct a long-term study. However, the guy has a degree in molecular biology so it's not as if he's pulling shit out of thin air to justify his stance -- that's grossly misleading.
While I don't agree with everything he said, there's a lot that I feel is very fair. It's sad the media wrote him off as a misogynist. Misogynist don't write pages of suggestions on ways to encourage women into STEM and into leadership positions.
Yes, there have been male parents being discriminated against because some companies don't feel that men could ever be considered a "primary" guardian -- that designation is reserved for women, only. Thus, men can't get the full allotted paternity leave time; only women can. Just recently did the courts decide this is unfair; both men and women can carry the title and deserve equal time off. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/30/business/fathers-parental...
That said, I've seen cases where the opposite is true. Parents are treated well but other groups aren't. I know several friends working at a large, well-known, evil gaming studio. They've had controversy in the past surrounding how they pushed employees to work insane crunch. When it became public, they (moderately) changed. Project managers would never ask women to work late, nor ask an employee who is a parent. For parents, this is great... however, they pushed all that work to others.
If you're male, single, a PM asks you to work overtime (without pay) and you decline, it will be a detriment to your career. After all, you have no kids therefore no legitimate reasons to say no. Be prepared to receive negative, nebulous feedback on your quarterly reviews.
"It doesn't feel like this employee is a team player."
"I question their commitment to the project."
"This employee seems dispassionate about their job."
I've worked with a project manager who carried a similar sentiment. In a candid conversation, he said to my face that he'd never ask women to work overtime. However, if you're male and under the age of 35, you should, "know better." If you're getting into the tech industry, you should expect to work at least 10hrs/day.
I have to agree. I learned the hard way that HR is not there to deal with grievances fairly. Their job isn't to shield employees from bad behaviour or absurd demands from management. Their job is to help and protect management.
Unions are the ppl there to protect employees from abuse, not HR.
The PLA will happily storm HK if the HK govt requests it... but they won't. The reason is money.
If the PLA move in, the wealthy elite in HK will start moving their assets out -- likely to Singapore. Political instability is never good for investments and when a handful of the millionaires/billionaires start migrating their wealth, it'll become a mass exodus.
HK only amounts to a small percentage of China's GDP now. This is also why HK has less free rein in its affairs. The "one state two systems" policy was convenient when HK was a giant in China and they needed the cash. With the economic free zones and growth of China itself, it's just less important compared to other cities in Guangdong. China would absolutely take a 2-3% GDP cut to be ridden of HK problems.
China is far more worried about public image and international condemnation. Especially with all of the other scrutiny on China's affairs (xinjiang concentration camps etc)
"HK only amounts to a small percentage of China's GDP now" Echoing this statement, HK accounted for 18% of China's GDP when it became part of China in 1997. Today its neighboring city Shenzhen alone generates more GDP than HK. Nobody saw this coming twenty years ago.
The Chinese definitely saw it coming. The special economic zones were a specific plan to undercut HKs power and fuel mainland growth, which the CCP directly controlled. The mainland has always distrusted what it deems to be subversive ideas. HK and its ideas towards democracy has always been an existential threat.
I will say what I want about colonialism, and there's no bloody way in hell that world should have, or would have accepted a military campaign by the UK to keep Hong Kong British.
Let's also not forget that the entire reason that the CCP is in power in China today, is a century and a bit of colonial rape by various occupying powers, starting from the opium wars, and ending with the invasion of Manchuria by Imperial Japan. Unsurprisingly, this lead to two nationalist movements, the winner ending up on the mainland, the loser in Taiwan.
I don’t think it’s this simple. Ultimately stability is paramount and more important than wealth. Self preservation of the CCP may require intervention.
I’m sure they’d prefer to avoid having to use a heavy hand, but they will if they surmise that they have to.
China does not value the status/wellbeing of their millionaires/billionaires over the control of the CCP in people's minds, which is always the top priority.
I think they value their millions and billions more than either. And they made a fair number of those millions and billions through their relationship with mainland China and the CCP. If it looks like the mainland CCP is going to cost them their millions and billions, though...
At this moment, at least, the CCP is mostly pro big business and friendly to the rich (as many of them are themselves now). Of course, that could change at anytime, but the interests of the rich are more closely aligned with the CCP than the protesters atm.
Yes, I specifically meant the HK rich. They have lots of business interests outside of HK and inside China, so it isn’t very surprising that they are tied to the party at the hip. The same is actually true for Taiwan (rich Taiwanese are pro China even if working class Taiwanese are not).
Not sure why people are suggesting shadow-banning doesn't work. Shadow bans have existed for a long time, already. Message forums and MMOs have used this method to deal with toxic community members and it has already shown to be successful.
The way they measure the decrease in toxicity is based on support tickets. When organizations implement this feature, a reduction in complaints means they don't require as much support staff to deal with it. It saves them money.
The logic behind it is simple: Toxic community members want a voice to be heard. This method sends players the message that if you post something offensive or unwelcomed, it'll be voted down and no one will see it.
