This, Putin?
t would be over very quickly, with europe we wouldn't be as surgical as in ukraine"
lol, lmao. Is *that* why his 3 day operation in Ukraine is taking years? Because he's being too surgical? lol. Get fucked
diD yOU nOt hAVe ANy fRIEnDs?
What if I told you that people also make mixes of songs for their friends on CDs, you condescending fucking moron?
It's no friendly than the people choosing the interior to CD vinyl.
I was just saying the exact same thing to my bud just the other day!
Literally, I said to him "It's no friendly than the people choosing the interior to CD vinyl," and then my bud goes "Huh? Did you have a fucking stroke?"
If the risk were that great, you wouldn't be debating this. You would have already understood the sub-standard experience is the necessary one.
How exactly do you figure that the "necessary" experience is one in which the user can't configure "always ask for my credit card CVV number" or "always ask for MFA"? That...doesn't make any sense
RFK Jr is a quack. But that does not mean he didnt have a message that resonated. Some of his ideas I actually got behind like reducing coloring agents and "flavor" chemicals in our food.
So what you're saying is that this quack's message resonated with fucking morons even though they knew he was a quack. Cool story!
Inb4 states sign new laws to override federal laws. What is this statehood thing again?
This isn't Federal law. I know the legalese in the subject and summary can be hard to understand to the untrained eye, but you can tell it's not a Federal law, because it doesn't say that fuckface signed a "law" into effect; it says fuckface signed an "executive order", which is another way of saying "not a federal law"
Script kiddies won't ever find the good vulns now. APT groups are already using these systems.
What do you mean by "now"? Script kiddies -- by definition -- never found ANY vulnerabilities, let alone "good" one's.
The class in question was given IN PERSON.
lol, no it wasn't. If it was, you'd have a "receipt", lol.
I didn't carefully review the article
lol, no shit.
but that happened.
no it didn't. If it happened, the stories about it on conservative media would have referenced it, but they ALL refer to the LinkedinLearning video, not an in person class.
Anything about Linkedin Learning is a deliberate decoy
The entire story is about the content of the "Confronting Racism" video by Robin DiAngelo that was on LinkedinLearning
This is my last post on the topic.
lol, no shit. Because I proved you're a lying, little bitch. Well that, and it's time for you to queue up CockGobblers IV: The Voyage Home (To Gobble More Cock)
Coca-Cola told Newsweek that the video and images "are not part of the company's learning curriculum." Coca-Cola said it has a "Better Together" training initiative that includes access to the LinkedIn diversity lesson but that it "was not part of the company's curriculum. We will continue to listen to our employees and refine our learning programs as appropriate." On Tuesday, Coca-Cola sent an additional statement to Newsweek that read: "The video in question was accessible on a third-party platform and was not part of the company's curriculum, so it was not required. Our overall diversity, equity and inclusion training is required and received input from employees reflecting a wide range of backgrounds, views and expertise."
Was the article too many words for you to understand? Do you need it spelled out for you?
1) Coca-Cola subscribed to the Linkedin Learning training platform
2) Subscriptions to LinkedIn Learning get access to all of the content in the platform. Subscribers don't pick and choose with videos they get access to.
3) Coca-Cola's diversity training used videos in the Linkedin Learning platform, but that video was not one that was part of their training. Notice how your "receipt" doesn't have any proof that it was part of their training?
4) Coca-Cola employees could access that video within LinkedInLearning, just as they could access every other video in LinkedInLearning, but it wasn't mandatory, just as all the other content in LinkedInLearning that wasn't part of Coca-Cola's training wasn't mandatory
Being able to access a video doesn't mean it's mandatory. For example, just because your cable subscription gives you access to CockGobblers III: The Search For More Cocks To Gobble, that doesn't mean it's mandatory for you to watch it; it's something you do on your own because you take your hobbies seriously.
"hERE's mY rECeiPT", lol, lmao. you illiterate, gullible fucking clown
Real programmers don't comment their code. It was hard to write, it should be hard to understand.
