No, it says "their two daughters have given an undertaking in court that they will take full responsibility for the child.."
and
"She added that the family was considering using his sperm in surrogacy and that a relative had agreed to be the surrogate. “We will keep it in the family,” she said. Under Indian law commercial surrogacy is illegal."
So it seems the daughters agree to take responsibility, but there will be a surrogate.
I'd be happy to write a carefully crafted, specifically tailored cover letter when recruiters are willing to respond with a detailed, individualized rejection letter.
The thing is, it’s not symmetric. They have far more to lose by leaking specifics than you do. The most efficient cover letter conveys just how little initiation you will need to conform to company values. You should edit this down, but by no means do all the typing. The median rejection letter gets the same treatment.
No, it's not symmetric, but not at all in the way you describe.
Worst case, from the employer's side, is they might have to pay the successful candidate *gasp* a few tens of thousands more per year (out of a budget, in a huge percentage of cases, in the two-to-three-digit millions or higher).
Worst case, from the employee's side, is that they might not get any job. For months. During which they still have to pay for food, rent/mortgage, clothing, utilities, etc, possibly for several people.
And these days, the median rejection letter is none. Most employers just ghost prospective employees who didn't make the cut.
The worst case on the side of hiring is facing a lawsuit because you treated candidates unevenly. And the detail you go into about a candidate are too personal for the hiring process.
So you might have to pay some legal fees, and possibly a fine.
That's still not symmetrical in the common case. It's incredibly unlikely that such a thing would lead to a business going under, while it's all too likely for a job-seeker to have to spend months looking for a job, with no income, very little savings (because a huge percentage of Americans simply don't make enough money to save any even if they have jobs), and a horribly dysfunctional social safety net.
I can understand this perspective, but I think it can work both ways. I'm 44 years old, and would also rather work from an office than from home, primarily for social interactions, and wanting to work outside of my house. My experience has been the inverse of yours, that most of my younger colleagues, who have spent the majority of their careers working from home, would rather continue to do so, and either hadn't had positive experiences working in an office environment and don't crave a return to it, or have focused their needs for social interaction elsewhere.
From the FAQ:
"How does App Backend work?
App Backend utilizes a database to store and manage table data. It offers APIs and tools to perform CRUD (Create, Read, Update, Delete) operations on tables and their respective records. This allows developers to easily handle data organization and manipulation in their small projects."
A.. database you say?
"Is App Backend secure?
Yes, security is a top priority for App Backend. It incorporates authentication and authorization mechanisms to ensure secure access to data. Additionally, it follows best practices for data encryption and implements measures to protect against common security vulnerabilities."
Both authentication AND authorization. Definitely secure.
The person you're replying to is a persistent anti-LGBT poster on this site. They're just saying, in a cryptic way, that they don't like gay people. No point in engaging.
This post is not really on topic for HN IMHO, but you can see what kind of comments tend to accrue to posts with queer themes in the title.
But, isn't that backwards? 20 year old systems have been thoroughly exploited and usually do not benefit from more recent updates. It's true you can't patch every single vulnerability, but probability is a huge factor in risk. If many of the common exploits have been patched, it's simply harder for your average hacker, the difficulty and opportunity cost just go up.
It's not any user, it's a ransomware attack. So it was intentionally done to limit their ability to work. Also, don't assume they had backups, or that these backups weren't also targeted.
and
"She added that the family was considering using his sperm in surrogacy and that a relative had agreed to be the surrogate. “We will keep it in the family,” she said. Under Indian law commercial surrogacy is illegal."
So it seems the daughters agree to take responsibility, but there will be a surrogate.