[–] -4 points 1 day ago (12 children)

Meanwhile, on IMDB, this rapist is more popular than Sir Patrick Stewart. He is Trending. People are sick. Disclmer, I know that IMDB algoritm is "per click" but still, people are making list of movies to avoid? Anyway, I can't remember a good movie with this actor.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 4 days ago

    Look, first of all, I don’t adhere to any religion or “made-up rules” regarding food. I can respect anyone as long as they don’t force me to do something I don’t want to do. However, respect is always a two-way street. If the owner/manager hires someone who is Indian/Muslim/Italian/Japanese, the manager is expected to respect his/her beliefs and not expect him/her to violate those beliefs. If a customer wants something unusual and the establishment is willing to accommodate, everyone’s beliefs and wishes must be respected. Chefs, waiters, and other employees are not slaves and must do as they are told. It is the manager’s job to make that happen for the customer without violating the employees’ beliefs. Pineapple on pizza is a rare thing and a pizzeria can afford an Italian chef and at the same time satisfy its customers if the manager is a little flexible / smart. If every second customer asks for pineapple on pizza then an Italian chef is not qualified for that job.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] -1 points 5 days ago (7 children)

    It's not that simple. What if the chef is Saudi and the customer asks for bacon and he refuses because it's against his religion to use pork? Would that be an acceptable reason for refusing or would he have to violate his beliefs because some idiot wants something?

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  •  

    I’m developing a cross-platform desktop/mobile application for Windows, Linux, macOS, and Android.

    My company already has an official digital certificate issued by Telekom. It is recognized for legally binding electronic signatures and document signing. In other words, the state recognizes the certificate and the identity behind it.

    Yet that apparently isn’t enough for the major software platforms.

    Apple wants an annual developer fee if I want normal macOS signing/notarization and distribution without scary warnings.

    Google wants developers inside its Play Store ecosystem for normal Android distribution and updates.

    Microsoft expects software publishers to use its accepted code-signing trust infrastructure, which usually means paying a commercial CA or using Microsoft’s own signing services if you want Windows to recognize the publisher without warnings.

    So my question is: Why are these companies allowed to create their own private definition of “trusted developer,” even when a developer already possesses a legally recognized digital identity certificate?

    I understand the technical argument that document signing and code signing are different certificate purposes. But from the developer’s perspective, the result looks like this:

    “Your identity is legally verified, but we still won’t treat your software as trusted unless you participate in our approved ecosystem and, in many cases, pay.”

    Why isn’t there a vendor-neutral mechanism where a legally recognized organizational certificate can establish publisher identity across operating systems? Is this mainly about security, liability, PKI design, platform control, commercial incentives, or some combination of all of them? And more importantly: what prevents Microsoft, Apple, and Google from abusing their position as platform owners to turn “trust” into a paid gatekeeping mechanism?

     

    The United States is in the Star Wars universe.

    First there was the Republic. It wasn't perfect, but peace prevailed. Then a tyrant took power who wanted to make himself emperor, irreplaceable, unchangeable. Then A New Hope was born. But the Emperor strikes back (this is today). We wait for the Jedi to return and the Republic to revive. Unfortunately, that will be short-lived. A new dark force will rise again and subdue the Republic.

     

    Seriously, what Israel is doing today is no different from what the Nazis did before and at the beginning of World War II, extreme nationalism, illegal expansion, annexation of foreign territory claiming it historically belongs to them, propaganda using the latest technology, terrorizing neighbors, military at the center of society.

    view more: next ›