If the rosters are in some sort of pretty easily parsed or scrapable format from the nfl, as sports stats typically are, this is just a matter of finding every unique name. This is something that I imagine would take less than an hour or two for a very beginner coder, and maybe a second or two for the code to actually run
FYI for readers: All the major leagues have a stats API, most are public, some are public and "undocumented" with tons of documentation by the community. It's quite a feat!
For individual chargebacks and small scammy merchants, sure. Uber meanwhile processes $40 billion worth of transactions a year. There is zero chance they are facing any kind of "discipline" from credit card operators. At that volume they write their own terms.
Going by that theory why doesn't Visa just jack up their prices by 10x? After all what are merchants going to do, not accept Visa? Turns out yes, that's exactly what they will do. Look at the number of business that don't take Amex for example for the same reason. Large companies especially have enough leverage to negotiate their own deals with credit card operators, like Costco does with Visa.
CC companies have little choice. Laws in EU give right/priority to the customer, and the burden of proof to the company. Now, imagine pissing 1 million Europeans, and them all going to their banks and file a complaint. And Uber (or any other vendor) be hit by 1 million claims that they have to fight for one-at-a-time.
Western transition away from fossil fuel usage is still a reduction in net fossil fuel usage when compared to no shift at all. In other words fossil fuel usage might still be growing, but it is growing at a slower rate. If we accept that fossil fuel usage should be minmized then it very much matters.
Aside from that; this argument reduces to an exceptionally bad moral stance which is: Someone else is doing bad things, therefore that justifies me doing that bad thing. Or as you might phrase the counter-argument to a young child: just because someone else is littering doesn't mean that it is ok for you to litter.
Just to clarify, many third wave shops do serve medium and dark roasts. My point is that third wave coffee shops often call a roast dark when they are actually medium or light. Additionally, I think only light roasts really qualify as third wave.
Most of the coffees you listed look like actual dark roasts.
"Full City Roast" with "lemon zest" in the flavor notes raises some red flags for me. Indeed, from the reviews: "Yum! I don't like dark roasts, and this is not a dark roast which is why I liked it. Lots of chocolate. Very smooth, not bitterness, a hint of fruit as it cools. I really enjoyed drinking this."
"Imunika Black" might also be an exception: the "blackberry" tasting note makes me think it isn't very dark.
I see more with citrus or other fruity descriptions, and I doubt those are dark roasts either.
There are massive telescopes around the world with adaptive optics doing cutting edge observations. Their service time is still under high demand. Those aren't just 'pretty pictures'.
Much of our current understanding of physics is rooted in astronomical observation.
Many planets and asteroids have been discovered by amateurs using telescopes and the visible light spectrum, even in the modern era.
More directly practicable, astronomy has given us an understanding of space weather and solar ejections which are fairly critical to things like grid stability and minimizing damages to man made satellites.
Dismissing the loss of the night sky as “pretty pictures” is dramatically underselling astronomy and the benefits that astronomy bring to all of us.
It depends on the state, but you don’t have to prove intent, you have to prove that the conditions of your job changed enough that it is an unreasonable burden.
If they transfer you to a location that requires an additional hour of commuting, you just have to prove that the commute takes an extra hour.
No. The government authority in charge of employment decides whether that change is enough of a change of the original job that it constitutes constructive dismissal.
If so, you can quit your job and are eligible for unemployment and any other legal benefits of having been fired without cause, and a claim is put against the employers account in the unemployment system.
Oh for unemployment sure, but the claim here is that the person hired under a DEI initiative is now let go, but under a different scheme of “restructuring”. Now their job would be to find redress and either reverse that or win monetary damages. It’s not impossible but it’s an uphill battle unless someone find a written directive somewhere a red flag. Or all the terminated employees somewhere coordinate to prove a particular pattern.
I wasn’t commenting on that case. Constructive dismissal is irrelevant in that instance if you have been let go since you don’t have to prove that your job was changed if it no longer exists.
Also, it is perfectly legal to terminate someone in most of the US under a restructure.
My original response was just pointing out that proving constructive dismissal doesn’t have to do with the intent of the employer, merely the effect of those actions. In your original example the employer can’t pretend that asking someone to commute to Alaska three days a week is reasonable and therefore they weren’t fired without cause when they refuse to do that.
reply