I looked at the rule. If I'm reading it right, compensated reviews are acceptable as long as it's an actual review by the person in question, and excerpts used are representative of the full review. Payment, including in the form of product, must not be conditioned on the content of the review. Though if I read it right, the reviewer doesn't have to have experience with the product as long as it is clear to the reader that the review is not based on experience with the actual product. (I assume this is allowed to allow the use of reviews of other products by the manufacturer to establish trust in the company itself.)

How is it different from the master level fader on a mixer? Every mixer I've personally used had the ability to adjust the levels of the input, and separately control the over-all level of the various output groups.

My understanding is that they started using screwheads that were designed to be able to use slotted, Phillips, or Robinson drive, but since none of them work that well, tool companies started making screwdrivers that have a head designed to fit the combination.

I'm sure they do throw noise-ads. After Target had the issue with outing a teen's pregnancy because the ads were too well targeted, I imagine everyone tries to de-target the ads enough to keep it from seeming as creepy.

Even in 2014, I'm pretty sure that only applied to people who were still on legacy plans that didn't want to give up some perk on a 10- or 15-year-old plan. I got Verizon in around 2004 or so, and even back then they only advertised unlimited text plans. You might have been able to get a limited plan, but only if you specifically asked for it.

I've never been able to figure out what business model Redbox Instant was supposed to be serving. It was more expensive than a DVD rental, and required you to use yet another streaming app that had no better prices and no real exclusives.

Even in the US, the difference in fraud protection between debit and credit cards is largely one of timing. As long as you report it lost or stolen within 2 days of discovering the issue (practically speaking, within two days of receiving the statement, as they can't prove you knew it was lost before then), you are still limited to $50, and as long as it's within two months of the statement date, $500, but like credit card companies, banks tend to waive this allowance. It sounds like you are generally using the term debit vs credit card the same way as the US, debit cards in the US are just ATM cards that are also branded with a Visa or Mastercard (typically) logo, and are accepted by the respective network. They'll all have some sort of note on them that indicates they aren't credit cards, typically "DEBIT" somewhere on the front.

Most of those merchants (that accept debit cards) aren't actually treating the cards differently, and put the hold on the card regardless of debit or credit. The difference is that on a credit card, it's a hold against your credit limit, while on a debit card, it's a hold against the balance in your account. Since most people have a fair bit of headroom on their credit limits, this hold has no practical effect on them. Most people expect to be able to spend all the money in their checking account, however, and may even intentionally keep the balance low to prevent fraudsters from being able to take as much. In this case, knowing that you are losing access to money above and beyond the cost can be important in order to assure that you have sufficient available balance to cover the hold. The main difference to the merchant (on a "purchase" that has the potential to end up much higher than the initial cost) is that a customer that knows they've done something that increases their liability to the merchant can empty the bank account linked to the debit card to force the upcharge to be declined, while they would have to max out the credit card to do the same on a card.

If you dig into the article's references, it appears the work they were doing for the company was specifically intended for use by the UAE government, and according to DOJ press releases, they had been warned that they needed to apply for a defense export license on multiple occasions. The summary makes it look it was essentially the equivalent of working for the UAE version of Microsoft, where the government will likely end up using some of your products, but it seems to be closer to equivalent to contracting with Lockheed Martin to provide consulting services on the newest fighter jet that the military is procuring.

Just curious, do you have metrics to show that it was your sales team meeting again and not follow-on economic effects from the general situation improving enough that your company decided it was worth it to resume in-person meetings?

It's a reference to the foam Nerf toys, and has been used (particularly in gaming circles) for reducing the effectiveness of something long enough that it was referenced in a 2002 New York Times article. It seems like the Nerf brand named itself after the nerf bars you're referring to, as the foam padding they used was similar to the material that Nerf uses in their products, but in an article targeting primarily gamers, it's a perfectly reasonable word to use. It's definitely not a term this writer made up.

According to the article, she's hard of hearing, so phone calls are also difficult, with her needing the assistance of her children to make or receive calls. That's part of the reason he made it, essentially to use as a home made automated TRS.

To me it sounds like naming rights to a gallery containing one print. As long as that section of the "museum" is open, you can show it to your date, but if the museum closes the exhibit, you're left with nothing but a donation receipt.

You missed the handwaving where they also get rid of coal at the same time:

That's a bit of an oversimplification. Scarcity also counts. If the unique usefulness of gold is sufficiently large in comparison to the total amount of available gold, it can still be worth more than iron, even if you would rather give up gold than iron if forced to make the choice.