There are also quite a few companies that offer “unlimited” vacation, but in practice they pressure/shame their employees not to take “too much” time off.
When Cadence switched to "unlimited" vacations, my manager straight up told me that he expects it to be three weeks unless I exceed his expectations, or it will adversely affect my performance reviews.
Which is how it effectively works, except usually managers are less direct.
When I got my first broadband Internet connection my contract explicitly prohibited me from using NAT. Apparently my Internet provider was concerned I would use NAT to connect multiple computers thus “stealing” bandwidth. This concern was not completely unfounded since people sometimes would set up one connection and share it with neighboring apartments. Also having one computer per household was normal back then.
I live in an apartment block where each flat is likely spending £30-60 per month on broadband. Even accounting for the odd power user, I reckon we could get away with sharing a 1-2 Gbps connection and benefit from the collective cost savings. Legal accountability aside, I kinda like the idea of a neighbourhood network commune.
Circa 2003 when we got the first WiFi access point set up (with no password), we started noticing people with laptops appearing next to our homes. It took us a few seconds to realize they found a free WiFi and walked around to find a spot with better signal.
Now the company has to pay one of their lawyers ($$$) to show up, or the claim is a default judgement, which they have to pay.
So the lawyer shows up and says blah blah mandatory binding arbitration. The judge can interrupt and say "don't care, judgement against, pay the man". Or the opposite, in which case at least you cost them more than they cost you.
Which is why they probably take the default judgement and pay you.
At least in some courts, I would think filing a motion to dismiss would be enough, without swnding a lawyer to court... but I have never been theough that process before so I can't say for sure?
Still takes time, and arbitration isn't all that scary, ao forcing them to arbitrate can also be a costly endeavor for them.
I would think this is possible. I've often agreed with the other party's lawyer that oral arguments on MtDs are unnecessary and then we just let the judge rule "on the papers" without anyone having to be there in person. The judge can then just file a written order with his ruling.
Bear in mind that motions and discovery are highly frowned upon in Small Claims courts that I've litigated in. And 95% of the time the court will rule in favor of the bigger party if they bring a lawyer, just out of general hatred of courts for unrepresented litigants.
In most situations small claims court is generally self-represented, with claims for legal costs capped at a certain level dependent on the amount being claimed. For example, in NSW, Australia, there is a different cap for costs under $1000 vs $1000-$5k, and $5k-$20k. One might expect a judge to look poorly upon a large multinational sending a $2k/hr lawyer to a $500 hire car dispute.
If the arbitrator is specified as the American Arbitration Association, usually yes. See section R-9 of the AAA Consumer Rules.[1]
JAMS just updated their "minimum standards" for consumer arbitration as of May 1, 2024, and they now seem to allow for transfer to small claims court.[2]
The Supreme Court has repeatedly and willfully ignored the plain meaning of the statutes, congressional intent in writing the FAA, as well the standard rules of statutory interpretation effectively rewriting Title 9 into something it was never intended.
At this point fixing it requires congressional action.
It’s not overriding the legal system, it willfully sidestepping it. But obligating the contracted party to agree. The issue of course is that Hertz (in this case) can put whatever random requirements into the contract, and you can’t arbitrarily strike them. You still need/want their service.
That said, just because there’s an arbitration clause in the contract doesn’t mean you’re absolutely stuck. You can hire a lawyer and try to get out of it. They’re trying to keep you from doing something like that.
you are right. still, i don't think cp/m was used so much until the very late 70s, simply because microcomputers were not used so much until then. and at that time vms was far more powerful. i remember the first time i used vms compared with cp/m on a z80 - no contest.
> simply because microcomputers were not used so much until then
Not really, no.
It's not that they weren't used. It's that they didn't exist yet.
The first 8-bit microprocessor, the Intel 8008, was 1972. The first chip for which CP/M was developed was the 8080 in 1974. It took a few years for mass availability.
Given that you got your years badly wrong in your first comment, did you not think "hey I should check this" before commenting again?
When I was a kid my grandparents had an old style TV with vacuum tubes. It also required several minutes to “heat up” before the picture appeared. I guess we’ve come a full circle.
It’s 600 million years not 600 thousand. Big difference. Species usually do not last that long so there is no reason to believe any humans will exist at that time.
reply