Seer of the tapes! Knower of the episodes!
It will vary by state, but generally:
When only one of the two parties is unwilling to continue the employer-employee relationship, it is obvious who is the moving party. If employment was still available to the claimant and the claimant refused to continue working, then the claimant is the moving party. If the employer will not allow the claimant to continue work, even though the claimant wants to, then the employer is the moving party.
It’s also an English expression.
The Romans named their years after who was elected Consul that year. There were two Consuls, so you’d say “in the consulship of Jones and Smith”. 59BC was Julius Caesar and some other guy. The other guy was so unimportant that Romans joked by calling it the consulship of “Julius and Caesar”.
The researchers say they derived the name of its genus, hotwheels, directly from the beloved toy due to the structure of the male spiders’ reproductive organs. […] “Because of the lack of nerves in the palpal bulb, the challenges faced by a male spider attempting to copulate can be likened to those of a person attempting to adjust a complex, delicate mechanism in the dark, using an elongate, elaborately formed fingernail”
It doesn’t have to be addition. It could be a hash function, etc.
All participants select their own random whole number and publish it to the group. All participants add all the numbers together. The result is either odd or even (heads/tails) and everyone arrives at the same result independently.
Annual commemorative pastry observance
plea for 1/2 that was rejected
The rejected plea was for 6 months.
That’s not exactly what happened.
Aaron committed suicide before his case went to trial, and so he was never convicted let alone sentenced. 35 years was never even likely; had it gone to trial there’s every reason to think he’d have been acquitted outright, or at worst given a slap on the wrist. Not that he should have even been charged, of course.
“Richard Dawkins confirms intelligent design mostly likely explanation”
Not only is it normalized, but it’s being weaponized. See, for example, the recent XZ backdoor which was equal parts hacking and a psi-op against the maintainer.
When in doubt, shut up.
The best way to make money in Vegas is to sell light bulbs.
Not exactly the same problem. In the same way that gun control doesn’t address the problem of hostile foreign militaries. Yes, both involve guns, but the laws and policies that address one are inapplicable and inappropriate to the other.
The law in question addresses the problem of foreign adversaries having easy access to manipulate US public opinion. The law you suggest addresses the problem of advertisers having that access. Both are serious concerns, both need to be addressed, but they are not the same problem and the solutions are markedly different.
require every company operating within the US to show users exactly what data is collected and allow them to delete any or all of it as desired
That would be a very different kind of law from the one we’re talking about.
That’s the opposite of what the court said.
Well, no. The courts struck down Trump’s Tiktok ban because he used an executive order that overstepped his authority.
Tiktok has been a subject of national security concerns since at least 2020.
I wouldn’t willingly live anyplace else.