There are other precautions: the job application has to be mailed to a physical address and can easily get "lost", the requirements for the position are numerous and peculiar (the #1 in the old times used to be fluency in a foreign language, but DOL/USCIS eventually got tired of that one, still, since the requirements are for a particular person, it can be any random mix of skills, all of which are hard requirements), and the interview process itself is not designed to pass anyone as the person, on whose behalf the PERM is being filed, won't be interviewing. One would be spending time much more productively applying to real vacancies. The only winning play here is to go through the process and sue the company to get some pain and suffering judgment, which I have not heard being successfully done (but I don't really follow this closely so I could be just ignorant).
No expert on this, but in my estimation the nature of the law and process makes it hard to sue unless you're a one-to-one match with the job posting or invented part of the tech stack being used. Companies across various industries pass up on qualified people every day.
Maybe he should, Meta's main product has peaked in their biggest markets, and his last massive bet went nowhere. He may not be the right person to lead the company at this point.
Selling on Amazon requires a registered trademark. If you're a random factory in Shenzhen you don't care about branding, you just want to be able to sell your stuff on Amazon, so you just put together random letters in the hope that your registration won't conflict with anything else. You don't want to have to deal with back-and-forth with USPTO, you don't care about having a meaningful, memorable, or interesting name, you just want an Amazon listing.
Coincidentally the majority of USPTO trademark submissions are literally just random strings of letters now for this reason.
> Selling on Amazon requires a registered trademark
This is not true. A trademark is only required for Amazon's brand registry which gives brand owners control over who is allowed to sell their branded products.
if I had to take a blind guess: Chinese doesn't have a concept of casesensitivity. It's a logographic language so casesensitivity is almost irrelevant.
Golang. You build one fat binary per platform and generally don't need to worry about things like dependency bundling or setting up unit tests (for the most part it's done for you).
It would certainly show up. Maybe not as a recognizable plane, but at the very least you could make out the plane-shaped shadow (or more accurately lack of reflection).
Yes, radar shadow is how you would find it. But your sensor must be performing well enough for it to be able to distinguish a shadow from the surface backscatter (ie. radar signature) the aircraft is sitting on. This is usually not a problem for rough surfaces (eg. grass or dirt, or some types of pavement), but it can be more problematic for surfaces with more specular scattering.
For those less obsessed with SAR images: calm water surfaces are good examples of surfaces with specular scattering, they are basically black/extremely low magnitude areas in SAR images. Example: https://x.com/umbraspace/status/1831111648498810967
I wonder if the tarmac/runways used for stealth planes take this into account and are somehow especially smooth or otherwise special. Also how would such an image look like, I guess one would still see some multi-bounces between aircraft and tarmac making it's way back to the SAR antenna.
Also good point regarding multibounces and multipath. I would expect eg. landing gear returns to be standing out in those cases (cockpit too, although probably the canopy is coated to prevent radar penetrating).
reply