I find claiming to predict for 2021 is a bit silly. I bet that different analysts have wildly different predictions. But hey, everybody has to earn money some way, right?
3439 posts • joined 3 Sep 2007
Yeah... The issue is that a CV sent by a black woman gets less answers than the same exact CV sent by a white male. People's judgement is tainted by the race and gender of applicants. Which is unfair, right?
That's why recruiters get unconscious bias training, and receive special instructions to check more carefully CVs sent by women and minorities. That's unequal treatment, but arguably, more fair.
Are gambling apps allowed on iPhones? I'm not sure it would make such a big difference in market share, but maybe I underestimate how many people want to gamble with real money on their phone.
Interesting that they specify not to use Google's payments platform. Looks like they are scared of legal issues. Or maybe they worry about morals. (Seriously! Google doesn't allow ads for guns either)
I think it's fine to have a few work questions during my breaks, the same way I think it's fine to answer a call from my wife while I'm working. If I really want a complete break, I'd probably hide myself in a corner or leave the building.
Ideally, your work should be judged by its output, and not by the amount of hours you spend at your desk. But if it's the latter, then doing something else at your desk enters a grey area, because it's not clear if you're working or not... Unless you are also marking down your hours in a timesheet (bleargh).
Regarding this particular case, I think the employer is allowed to say that while at work, at your desk, you shouldn't work for other companies. But using keylogging to catch trespassers goes too far, and that seems indeed what the court said was the problem.
"Leap of net neutrality from 'carriers shall not charge some content more' to 'poor people shall not get free partial Internet' = astounding".
I'm not sure it's astounding; in the very minimum, it's technically correct... I mean, the point of net neutrality rules is that you shouldn't offer a data service where your own content is privileged over other people's content, because it's an unfair competition between the two types of content, right?
That said, I think there are plenty of places that offer you free wifi, but only to look at the company's website. Does that infringe on net neutrality?
Note that the counterfeiting is illegal globally, not just in Canada.
Maybe, but France is also asking Google to remove results globally, and that's to respect the European right to be forgotten, which does not exist in the rest of the world.
Google is probably terrified of having such requests escalate to completely trivial things like lèse-majesté laws in Thailand, and that's why they're fighting every lawsuit.
Is it even necessary to be on Facebook to earn them money? I think that like Google, they have adverts on third-party sites, with profiles built by tracking your IP on third-party sites. No Facebook account needed.
In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the reason of Facebook's success was the data it gathers from third-party websites, rather than what they find on their own site. People might well display more honestly their tastes while surfing the web than with their curated image on a social network.
Well, the French can't change the law by themselves, but they might manage to convince Germany that the European law should have an exception for multi-national corporations that have a presence in the country.
It would be a huge burden for small companies to have to declare taxes in every country, and that is why the treaties were written as they were. But companies like Google already have a presence in every country and are paying taxes on that. For them, it would be absolutely not difficult at all to declare in each country what they earn there. The reason they don't do it is not that it would be a huge operational burden, it's really only because they would pay more tax.
In a sense, my suggestion is a bit similar to the presence laws created in the US to force Amazon to collect sales tax. It used to be Amazon did not collect sales tax in most states, because sales tax on interstate transactions is supposed to be paid by the buyer. Then laws were written to say that if the company had any presence whatsoever in the state, even just a warehouse, then it shouldn't count as an interstate transaction, and the company had to collect sales tax. In the beginning, Amazon tried to only have a presence in a small number of states, but now they gave in and are collecting sales tax everywhere.
Forcing companies to declare revenue earned in the country, in each country where they have a presence, would not affect small companies; but it would prevent large corporations from shopping around for the best tax deal.
There are good reasons why a small company based in Ireland can sell services in other European countries without going to the trouble of declaring and paying tax in multiple places. This is an obvious way to make the economy more efficient. It makes sense even when there are third-parties in each country who help sell those products.
But the way it is now, nothing stops Google from having 700 employees in France who act like travel agents and help the French choose which contract they want to sign with Google Ireland. And the 700 travel agents receive a small compensation for their work, for which they duly pay tax.
I'm pretty certain that the UK saw nothing wrong with the whole idea, and in fact thought they would profit a lot, having relatively low corporate taxes. They just never saw Ireland coming from behind.
Now, if we want to change the situation, we need to change the law. Maybe something like "if the company controls a subsidiary with a significant number of employees in the country, then the revenue must be declared in that country". Lawmakers should stop complaining, and act.
There are good reasons why batteries often cannot be replaced easily.
With phone and laptop makers competing on who can put the largest battery in the thinnest device, the requirement of having the battery be a single big block is pretty devastating. If the battery is distributed in small chunks around the device, you can get a lot more power with less overheating problems.
Making devices easy to repair comes at a cost, which is either less power, or bigger sizes. And let's be honest, it's a small fraction of people who care so much about repairing their phones.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019