A CEO's job is...
A) Run the company in the most successful way that returns the greatest value over the long run.
B) Run the company in the way that most benefits society and the employees.
C) Create the greatest short term growth in stock prices so the current investors, who control their hiring, can sell and realize a profit.
Given it's the involved, activist shareholders that determine most CEO's hiring and firing - and they're looking for a dramatic change in company value over the short term...
Any CEO who chases A or B is an idiot who's going to ultimately get replaced by shareholders who want a sudden bump in value and then to get the hell out. They don't give a damn about whether the company will be worth more money in ten years because they intend to have sold, bought again when value tanks, sold after a short term solve, bought again when the value tanks... and repeated many times.
How a company does over ten years as a metric of CEO efficiency is just a demonstration of completely missing what CEOs are rewarded for.
The CEO who created a massive short term growth, then left and left the company to tank for a while, is worth that large bill to the shareholders who are trying to get just that.
Also, we don't get ponies just because we really, really want one and it's only fair!
If I'm doing my job properly as a manager, no one should ever be indispensable.
Highly valued? Sure. I want to build a team where everyone is exceptionally valued.
But if anyone ever becomes indispensable, I've failed in my job as a manager.
Why? The hit by a bus factor. That wonderful employee who loves me, who I love... can still get hit by a bus. Can still get sick. Can still have a loved one die. Can still have a relative offer to pay all expenses for a once in a lifetime six week world trip.
If I have any employee that I can't keep my team running without, even at zero notice, I'm not running my team well.
It may suck. It may be sad. It may require some juggling I'd much rather not do. But any indispensability means I've done my job badly.
This means, if someone quits with zero notice, I can handle it.
At that point, it's actually a good thing anyway. If they're so pissed off that they'd statement quit, I don't need them in the office, poisoning others, dragging their heels through their short timer's disease. Let's get them somewhere where they're happy and get my team of great people back doing great things. We'll live.
Strange thing? When you have a well run team that you can already be confident in, people rarely statement quit anyway. For some reason, they don't seem to feel the need. Imagine that. And when they do? You've got it handled anyway.
Does the company give at least two weeks paid notice to everyone it terminates?
Then my minimum will also be two weeks notice.
Does the company usually just tell people to gather their things and pay out the minimum it's legally required to?
Then my minimum will be the same.
Does the company generally give a couple of weeks severance unless for cause?
Then my minimum is also two weeks unless I'm quitting due to their cause.
Does the company have a good standard severance package?
Then I will also give them the option to have my work out longer.
Note: I say minimums. I'm also aware that, as poor as their behavior may be, I've also got my own reputation to watch out for. They may be a bunch of asshats. But my next employer is likely looking for reassurance that they'll get a respectful notice period and my quitting without notice, unless it's really easy to justify, just makes me look bad to future employers who background check.
To top that off, many modern security-oriented chips implement HMAC and AES in hardware, which uses even less power and is orders of magnitude faster still. Doing one complete round of AES3 takes thousands of cycles on a CPU but can be collapsed into a single step process in hardware using a fraction of the silicon of a 32bits CPU.
The RFID protocol has provisions to detect and mitigate collisions between multiple cards. If multiple cards try to respond at the same time, there is a random per-card delay before each card attempts to respond again and the reader can use that to enumerate cards that are within range until it finds the one it wants. Having multiple cards in range will merely slow down the enumeration process.
In my wallet, I simply put a stainless steel eraser stencil in the card pocket between my bank and credit cards.
Being contact-less does not systematically mean that the card relinquishes all data. NFC/RFID is able to wirelessly supply power to support a secure microcontroller and two-way secure authentication/encryption to prevent man-in-the-middle attacks. Companies simply chose not to implement it this way for some stupid reason.
Plain wireless ((EE)P)ROM is fine for anti-theft tags and basic identification but not wireless payments or other applications that require intrinsic trust.
"As if this isn't abusive enough, the candidates are not allowed to see nor challenge their report"
The data protection act, 1988, says they are.
You can naively write whatever you feel like into a ToS. But it won't hold us to the first even cursory legal challenge.
The ToS can say, "You grant the landlord the right to enter your apartment and invoke droit de signeur whenever you are passed out drunk." It doesn't make it true or remotely enforceable.
When you're referencing all Mexicans and call them murderers and rapists and some, you assume, are good people... You're a racist.
When you use the possessive to refer to African Americans... OK, then you're probably just ignorant.
When you call out Hiliary over Bill's infidelity yet the woman you're having an affair with gets caught screwing someone else under a lifeguard tower... You're a hypocrite as well as a cuckhold.
When you tell everyone how successful a businessman you are, having vastly lost money compared to if you'd just invested the money daddy gave you in the S&P500 and then claim the tax credit for earning UNDER $500K in NYC for each of the last three years, to go along with your many corporate and personal bankruptcies, you're a failure.
Though, actually, to be fair, I doubt he is a racist. To be a racist, you have to hold those beliefs. He's just hitched his wagon to those who hold them. He fits the definition of a sociopathic narcissist, a very scared and shallow little man who'll say and do whatever it takes to get what he needs.
In that regard, I actually feel sorry for the racists who do vote for him...
Those who vote against him always knew he was a sociopathic narcissist.
Those who vote for him, who really hoped he meant whatever he spouted to get their vote, are going to be the ones left with a far nastier shock when they no longer empower him and he needs to chase someone else.
When he bashed the Muslims, I said nothing because I wasn't a Muslim.
When he came for the Mexicans, I said nothing because I wasn't a Mexican.
And when he came for my guns, there was no one left to speak up for me.
I'm going to agree with you but only in the hopes we can become friends and you connect me with whoever sold you what you were smoking.
Neither party is who they were in twenty years ago. If you look at the degree of polarization, even then, there were some who could work across the aisles.
Go back as far as St Ronald and you get someone with more in common with current democrats than republicans.
Go twenty years further back and you have broadly un recognizable parties pivoting on some of their traditional issues as other of their traditional issues drove them to do so.
Go back half a century more and you've got parties no modern zealot could agree with as each held political territory that deeply appeals and deeply disgusts each of the current parties.
Just because a party once did something the better part of a century or two ago really means nothing in a world where 20-30 years can make a party unrecognizable to many of its old stalwarts.
Or, you know, whatever your talk radio of choice tells you.
Now can I get some of that weed?
We can't manage to stop looting the social security pot long enough to pay a decent pension to the elderly. So, somehow, we're going to get it right with a larger chunk of the population?
Not saying it's a good or a bad idea. Just observing that people have a gift for screwing up even the best of ideas.
A holding company is a thing where you hand an accomplice the goods while the policeman searches you.