I wonder about that. But there's definitely a seeming drive for puffery on individual resumes, and a collective drive for puffery on the entire platform in order to drive mindshare. The same kind of short-term thinking that has people ripping out existing features to "improve" a product, so they can claim that they actually did something in their tenure there.

Instead of doing something to fix a hard problem, say the obscene memory consumption of tabs as part of the base browser, they do things to make Firefox more attractive to say... advertisers who want placement on Firefox's default home page.

This is my impression as a user - I have no window into the workings of the Mozilla team aside from depressing news bits like this one featured on Slashdot...

I think we all know nothing good ever came from that place.

Republicans end individual mandate.
Republicans let the subsidies expire.

"Why would the Democrats do this to the American people??"

One of my state's Republican senators is all-in on chemtrails and "Solar Radiation Modification" lunacy. It's curious how these are the same people who think humanity isn't capable of affecting the climate by burning fossil fuels and pumping tons of CO2 into the atmosphere.

Yeah, and none of those or even the sub-$400 new laptops are worth buying when $150 5yo business laptops are available.

It's doubtful that Apple will create anything worth buying in the ~$500 market given the ~250GB storage on their $900 macbook air

Yeah they're whining here about this but they throw captchas relentlessly at those of us on standard net configs too. I would say its even more likely to get a robot accusation on desktop than a doublenat mobile session.

So I'm to understand that what happens to students in college is "indoctrination" but a 4-month primer on the superiority of western civilization is not.

Me: you know, many businesses already change between summer and winter schedules; many retail stores, many services, many public transit operators.....

how the hell could they make the "just one administrator" mistake?

It's not a mistake, because it's not a 'permissions/who can be administrator' 'mistake.' It's the account owner. It's the person who's credit card is on file.

Why would Apple 'comply with a court order' that has nothing to do with them?

If the court ordered the father to disband the account, and he didn't disband the account, he needs to be taken back to court to force compliance.

That being said, the article DID make clear that there WAS a court order for him to disband the account, and even if he was using in all the right ways for all the right reasons, not-complying with a court order is extremely problematic.

Then her remedy is to go back to court and compel the target of the order, aka the ex-husband, to do as ordered, not to claim that a third party with no standing in the case is at fault.

If you and I contract that I will sell you may Ford Escape for five grand, and you give me five grand and I don't give you the keys, you don't go to Ford and ask them to make you a key. They will, correctly, say "....and what does this have to do with us?" when you wave the sale contract at them.

And nothing Apple did or didn't do prevented the mother from having that custody.

She had a remedy from day one: make new accounts for the kids. Inconvenient? Sure. But way less inconvenient than most of the stuff that goes along with 'we're separating.'

*Should* Apple develop a system to deal with this a big more gracefully? I'd say so. But to conflate this with 'they're violating a court order for custody' is utterly ridiculous.

He's gotta leave us guessing because like other competitors MS has bought and killed countless studios and the games they produced.

So they're giving pregnant monkeys Tylenol?

Easiest solution is to issue employees a corporate credit card that they are responsible for. All reimbursable expenses have to be correlated against the copy of the statement issued by the credit card company to the corporation.

But what about cash expenses, you ask? Issue a per-diem for travel, and a periodic "here's your budget for IT refresh, whatever you don't spend, you get to keep."

My question is, what kind of receipt fraud are we looking at? Invented expenses that they're using to defraud the company, or real expenses that normally wouldn't be reimbursed that they're disguising as reimbursable ones?

Also, wouldn't invoice fraud be a bigger threat? Fake suppliers sending you real looking invoices in the same of actual suppliers, but with the bank details modified to point to the scammer's accounts instead? Instead of hundreds of dollars in fraud perpetrated by dozens, maybe hundreds of insiders (employees), you get tens, if not hundreds of thousands dollars of fraud perpetrated by outsiders trying to pretend that they're trusted suppliers. Or worse... an insider at your supplier deciding to doctor the outgoing invoice so they can skim money off the top...