Jesus - they don’t even name the report so interested people can search for it. Lame.

Also, least-intrusive doesn’t mean most-trustworthy. Just don’t use any of them or, if you do, be sure to take all steps at your disposal to not give any personal information to them.

Lol @ “some 20 years ago … ADSL from 2002”. Thanks for making me feel old!

lol - I love that I canned all my paid subs that were fucking me up the arse like this, and then used the savings to setup a half-decent Plex server for my family. Fuck those greedy cunts.

Well, that’s probably because he’s hit the cap on base salary. After a certain point in Amazon, the majority of your income at Amazon is derived from shares.

That said, after the signing shares are yours after the first 4-5 years, you’re down to the yearly grants they hand out, which come the year after they were granted, in quarterly amounts.

Also, if your brother is high up, he probably got more shares this year than usual, as Amazon announced that only certain levels and below were getting salary increases. Higher up only got shares.

God, that’s bleak

How are they retaining staff?

They retain them for the 4-5 years it takes for signing cash and signing stock units to all run out, at which point many people start to get itchy feet.

Yeah - they call it URA, for “unregretted attrition”. Tell me that doesn’t sound like a shitty way to manage your people.

You know, at some point, you gotta assume they’ll eventually hire and fire/lose all the usable talent they have access to, and shit like this will prevent them finding new talent. Until some exec “invents” WFH as a perk…

Absolutely nothing bad could ever come of this

Oh, sure. I get that. Sending yourself reminders is absolutely understandable. Sending yourself documented evidence of your plans to defraud someone is entirely different.

In a 2017 email to himself, Smith calculated that he could stream his songs 661,440 times daily, potentially earning $3,307.20 per day and up to $1.2 million annually.

Great idea, but why would you email yourself about it?

Isn’t the picture from Logan?

Edit: oh, it’s called johntucker.jpg.

Later in the same comment I mention how I think social media only benefits the corporations that run it.

It’s pretty clear what I meant.

Fucking hell. Where’s the incentive for responsible disclosure, if that’s the sort of (non) response you get?

My own belief is that all social media is a cancer, and to be avoided entirely. I’m able to do that for myself, but I’m also realistic about the chances of keeping my kids away from it. So, I focus my energy on trying to equip them with the mental skills to neutralise the toxic aspects of social media.

For my 9yo, that means teaching her to employ natural skepticism and critical thinking. I’m also trying to drum into her the understanding that social media is inherently untrustworthy and unreliable, and exists solely for the benefit of the corporations that run it.

That said, I’ve blocked Tik Tok on my home network, much to the older kids’ chagrin. They have to use mobile data if they want to access that shit on their phones.

The casting bit is the missing piece for me.

I’ve built a RasPi with Kodi for our caravan, to use Plex and stream our free-to-air TV here in Australia (using Musk’s space innernets). I just miss being able to cast from my phone, for the occasional thing I can’t do with a Kodi add-on.

Shit like this is why I intend to keep my (currently) 9yo as far away from social media as I can, for as long as I can. This fucking terrifies me, as it should any parent.

Well, at least where I live, phones are banned in schools. So that’s a good start.

This is odd advice, when you consider many kids in the same age group probably have access to (or own) a tablet device of some sort. The only difference with a smartphone is the ability to call and text, and portability while staying connected (assuming many tablets aren’t 4G/5G capable).

Or am I missing something here?

I paid a subscription fee for the option