>And I can't be in a position where I spend effort while the applicant spent none
But isn't that literally what you are paid for? Your job is to do the steps needed to hire someone and that includes reading through applicants. Why would the applicants -that are dojng this for free, for a promise of a posibility- need to put more effort than you?
I know you are not to be listened to when you dare say "innocent hand gesture made once", when he very clearly made it twice in a row; front, turn and repeat:
https://m.youtube.com/shorts/R_6dVlz6mug
That is there, recorded, and you are telling me to ignore what I see.
I know you won't care, this video is not for you, is there in case anyone else starts to belive your lies, they can see for themselves.
"together on the same space and with equal space".
If you do that, you are telling anyone that just overviews the articles that both views have the same validity and that is just a manner of disagreements between peers, and that is falling into their trap, by doimg that you are actively working FOR the flatbearth cause, even if you want to feel "fair", ypu are just the useful idiot they need to keep spreading and legitimizing.
Flat earthers should no be given even a second unless it is to mock them, we have known that the earth is "round" for 2 millenia, we cannot keep discussing the same things over and over just because a bunch of narcisists want to feel like "the know better".
"Compass for navigation" would actually confuse me as I expect a "Google maps pin" for that, for example.
Also <"?" for help>, that's literally text made an icon, hardly counts for this conversation.
As someone who uses emojis to a degree that is embarrasing, I agree tgat often are amazing to convey things tgat words have harder time, but I still have to accept that there is ambiguity in their meanings, yes, a bunch of conventions have rooted enough that most people would undertand the same, but get out of those or simply present them in a different environment and things change. Labels are way less ambiguous.
And with that, thanks to you, today I am a bit smarter than yesterday.
Thank you very much for that phrase, the rest of your post is a very good example for the layman, but that phrase should be the subtitle of a best selling privacy book.
I am not going to value the other sources, as I don't know some of them, but considering Fox News "unreliable" is even tame. You are better informed if you simply not watch news at all:
If you read Microsoft's response, they point at the companies issuing the MFA because -according to MSFT- "the companies are not entering the issuer in the label" and MSFT expect the issuer to be there.
I would imagine that, if that is their expectation, they would include the issuer in the label themselves, so, none of its products should have any issue.
The problem comes from using other provides -that use the "issuer" field to store the issuer (how quirky of them, amirite?)- while having the same email as identifier.
But isn't that literally what you are paid for? Your job is to do the steps needed to hire someone and that includes reading through applicants. Why would the applicants -that are dojng this for free, for a promise of a posibility- need to put more effort than you?
reply