(ℹ) Join us now at the IRC channel | ䷉ Find the plain text version at this address (HTTP) or in Gemini (how to use Gemini) with a full GemText version.
| schestowitz[TR] | > I'm sorry not to get back to you sooner but xxxxxx told us that we | Mar 05 01:22 |
|---|---|---|
| schestowitz[TR] | > weren't allowed to contact you, but now he's left I guess its okay! | Mar 05 01:22 |
| schestowitz[TR] | I thought he had done this. He did the same to me. Cannot speak to anybody. Isolating me. | Mar 05 01:22 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > I haven't dared look at the pensions! Could you tell me what the pension | Mar 05 01:22 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > provider said? Was it Now Pensions? | Mar 05 01:22 |
| schestowitz[TR] | Nobody can find the pension the workers had until 2016. Even people who left the company years ago are told by Standard Life that the account isn't there and they refuse to say anything else. It's therefore suspected the current pension can't be trusted to be there either. People affected by this are still investigating. | Mar 05 01:22 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > Roy's blog has made me laugh when he talks about Mr Kink instead of Mr | Mar 05 01:22 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > xxxxx! I laughed at some of the memes too :) | Mar 05 01:22 |
| schestowitz[TR] | Thanks to you we know the nature of his relationship. | Mar 05 01:22 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > Can you tell me why you've both left now? You couldn't tell me before | Mar 05 01:22 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > and all we were told by xxxxx is that you have left! | Mar 05 01:22 |
| schestowitz[TR] | I was being picked on, accused of something I didn't do and did not even know about. So I resigned. | Mar 05 01:22 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > Now xxxxxx is gone, xxxx is the only CEO and has been working double | Mar 05 01:22 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > shifts as there is no-one else. However a new guy has just been employed. | Mar 05 01:22 |
| schestowitz[TR] | Maybe he doesn't know what's really happening and will find out over time. | Mar 05 01:22 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > Because you two left, we haven't been able to take any holiday, so as | Mar 05 01:22 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > this new guy has just started I have taken 5 days and am currently in | Mar 05 01:22 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > xxxx in xxx staying with an old friend for ten days which is | Mar 05 01:22 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > great. Tomorrow we go to xxxxx for the day. | Mar 05 01:22 |
| schestowitz[TR] | Sounds great! | Mar 05 01:22 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > What are you both going to do for work now? | Mar 05 01:22 |
| schestowitz[TR] | I had a job interview this past Thursday. Fingers crossed. | Mar 05 01:22 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > Hope all is well with you both! | Mar 05 01:22 |
| schestowitz[TR] | And you as well. | Mar 05 01:22 |
| schestowitz[TR] | Re: Article on MS as a "religious" debacle | Mar 05 01:27 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > Greetings chaps, | Mar 05 01:27 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > | Mar 05 01:27 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > I would greatly appreciate your thoughts on the following with regard | Mar 05 01:27 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > to clarity and message. It concerns recent remarks on the Internet | Mar 05 01:27 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > on "religious choice" and technology. | Mar 05 01:27 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > | Mar 05 01:27 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > | Mar 05 01:27 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > Roy, would you care to publish this once I am happy with it? | Mar 05 01:27 |
| schestowitz[TR] | I would love to! | Mar 05 01:27 |
| schestowitz[TR] | I heard the same many times before over the years and we wrote some articles to that effect, so it strikes a chord. | Mar 05 01:27 |
| schestowitz[TR] | Going to read now... | Mar 05 01:27 |
| schestowitz[TR] | Note: I've not _yet_ read but intend to read the article shorNote: I've not _yet_ read but intend to read the article shortly. | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > I wouldn't like to disqualify the use of religious beliefs as a means to | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > support free software, or even to defend one's our freedoms. | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | I beg to differ. For a long time Free software was characterised as religious dogma; as if wanting to share something that does not cost money to replicate is akin to superstition. In 2020, after Red Hat (then IBM) had participated behind the scenes in a campaign of defamation against the Free software _community_ (the real one) I researched IBM's past to highlight hypocrisy: anything from misogyny to racism. I reckoned that in year | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | s to come they'd try to weaponise "isms" against people not controlled by corporations and/or CoCs. And I was right. Then they contacted me, trying to get me not to talk about their past. | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | But the point is, if people accuse X of being a "religious", one way to respond is projection. Then they desist. | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | I later made a whole wiki page for it: | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | http://techrights.org/wiki/IBM | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > I mean, faith pretty much by definition involves made-up beliefs, | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > whether or not they have a root of truth, or an ethical/moral | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > underpinning. | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > As much as I trust the scientific method better than religious beliefs, | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > the Brazilian constitution, for one, equates the protections to | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > religious and philosophical beliefs, and my perception is somewhat | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > colored by it, as I find there's a lot of sense behind it: if you dig | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > deep enough, even the most scientific belief will likely run into | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > premises taken for granted that are hardly indistinguishable from | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > enlightened, questionable religious beliefs. So trying to draw a line | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > between them on these grounds risks coming across as elitist. | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > I mean, we do have our parody religion, and though it's for fun, I | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > wouldn't mind at all using it to advance our cause, and I would have | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > named the Church of Emacs as my religious belief had I been given the | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > longer questoinnaire in the ongoing census in Brazil. | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > Furthermore, someone's inability to successfully articulate | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > philosophical, scientific arguments for e.g. an intuition that leads to | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > self-consistent, self-preserving, self-respecting behavior might as well | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > be [md]isqualified as religious fanaticism, and in our case it often is, | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > but should it? I don't think so. | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > OTOH, inasmuch as such fallacies are used against our cause, attempting | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > to disqualify our philosophical foundations as religious whims, we might | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > as well respond by using the labels stapled on us, fairly or not, to | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > advance our cause. | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > ---- | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > Now, reading your article without knowing the news that prompted it (I | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > read the link at the bottom only after going through the whole piece), | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > it appeared to me that someone was claiming religious alignment to | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > insist on using Microsoft software, rather than the other way round, or | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > even that the company insisted on using Microsoft software on religious | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > grounds. Those sounded awfully implausible to me. But the confusion | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > started at the title, and remained distracting throughout. | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | Titles are important. As long as they don't mislead or tell a lie (eye-catching for the sake of traffic, at the expense of truth itself) I think it's fair play.tly. | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > I wouldn't like to disqualify the use of religious beliefs as a means to | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > support free software, or even to defend one's our freedoms. | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | I beg to differ. For a long time Free software was characterised as religious dogma; as if wanting to share something that does not cost money to replicate is akin to superstition. In 2020, after Red Hat (then IBM) had participated behind the scenes in a campaign of defamation against the Free software _community_ (the real one) I researched IBM's past to highlight hypocrisy: anything from misogyny to racism. I reckoned that in year | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | s to come they'd try to weaponise "isms" against people not controlled by corporations and/or CoCs. And I was right. Then they contacted me, trying to get me not to talk about their past. | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | But the point is, if people accuse X of being a "religious", one way to respond is projection. Then they desist. | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | I later made a whole wiki page for it: | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | http://techrights.org/wiki/IBM | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > I mean, faith pretty much by definition involves made-up beliefs, | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > whether or not they have a root of truth, or an ethical/moral | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > underpinning. | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > As much as I trust the scientific method better than religious beliefs, | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > the Brazilian constitution, for one, equates the protections to | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > religious and philosophical beliefs, and my perception is somewhat | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > colored by it, as I find there's a lot of sense behind it: if you dig | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > deep enough, even the most scientific belief will likely run into | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > premises taken for granted that are hardly indistinguishable from | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > enlightened, questionable religious beliefs. So trying to draw a line | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > between them on these grounds risks coming across as elitist. | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > I mean, we do have our parody religion, and though it's for fun, I | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > wouldn't mind at all using it to advance our cause, and I would have | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > named the Church of Emacs as my religious belief had I been given the | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > longer questoinnaire in the ongoing census in Brazil. | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > Furthermore, someone's inability to successfully articulate | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > philosophical, scientific arguments for e.g. an intuition that leads to | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > self-consistent, self-preserving, self-respecting behavior might as well | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > be [md]isqualified as religious fanaticism, and in our case it often is, | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > but should it? I don't think so. | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > OTOH, inasmuch as such fallacies are used against our cause, attempting | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > to disqualify our philosophical foundations as religious whims, we might | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > as well respond by using the labels stapled on us, fairly or not, to | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > advance our cause. | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > ---- | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > Now, reading your article without knowing the news that prompted it (I | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > read the link at the bottom only after going through the whole piece), | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > it appeared to me that someone was claiming religious alignment to | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > insist on using Microsoft software, rather than the other way round, or | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > even that the company insisted on using Microsoft software on religious | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > grounds. Those sounded awfully implausible to me. But the confusion | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > started at the title, and remained distracting throughout. | Mar 05 01:38 |
| schestowitz[TR] | Titles are important. As long as they don't mislead or tell a lie (eye-catching for the sake of traffic, at the expense of truth itself) I think it's fair play. | Mar 05 01:38 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-techrights.org | IBM - Techrights | Mar 05 01:38 | |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-techrights.org | IBM - Techrights | Mar 05 01:40 | |
| schestowitz[TR] | >> WIPO is WIPING domains. | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | >> See | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | >> http://techrights.org/wiki/WIPO | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | >> http://techrights.org/wiki/Francis_Gurry | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > It could be a good idea to blog an annual anti-report or something about | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > this practice, e.g. domains censored in 2022, with stats for each | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > mediation service. | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | That would be a lot of work. If someone's willing to do it... | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | >> Combining feeds is hard in WordPress, we hope to get off of WordPress | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | >> eventually, but there is: | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | >> http://techrights.org/category/intellectual-property/ | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > Is that the best one to use? I updated the config to this, commenting | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > out patents as I can only follow one URL: | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > #[http://techrights.org/category/patents/feed/] | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > [http://techrights.org/category/intellectual-property/feed/] | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > name = Techrights | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | The latter category is barely used. Better to use "patents". | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | >> i think making the categories more hierarchical can help, but I don't | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | >> want to invest any more in WordPress. The "ecosystem" of WordPress is | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | >> unsafe and bloated. | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > Have you looked at Jekyll? I use it for a few projects. None of these | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > platforms is perfect. Jekyll requires some template-tweaking to force | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > it to be multilingual, for example, but it is flexible enough that such | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > things can be done. | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | We try to build our own, but it's simple at this stage. | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > I could do something on my side to aggregate multiple sources from the | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > same domain or simply list them as multiple entries in the config. I | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > think that planet-venus will do some deduplication on my side too. | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | That would be good. | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > I don't have Rianne's key so I can't CC her. Can you please ask her to | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | > upload her public key in a keyserver, website or send by email? | Mar 05 01:46 |
| schestowitz[TR] | I'll tell her. | Mar 05 01:46 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-techrights.org | WIPO - Techrights | Mar 05 01:46 | |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-techrights.org | Francis Gurry - Techrights | Mar 05 01:46 | |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-techrights.org | Intellectual Monopoly | Techrights | Mar 05 01:46 | |
| schestowitz[TR] | When it comes to morality, IBM hasn't a leg to stand on, but it relies on collective amnesia. On another note, RMS did a session with Brazilians about a year ago. Overpopulation came up.Yes, with Catholics, so RMS with his views on overpopulation (which I share by the way) raised a stink and then they started talking about your daughter to make some point. It's the same when talking about religion. | Mar 05 01:53 |
| schestowitz[TR] | Notes on article: | Mar 05 02:06 |
| schestowitz[TR] | - headline akin to Richard Dawkins on children's religion at birth. | Mar 05 02:06 |
| schestowitz[TR] | - Reddit is a propaganda site censored by the likes of Microsoft and moderated to distort public perception. | Mar 05 02:06 |
| schestowitz[TR] | - Reddit gravitates towards making GNU/Linux look bad (it's how management there wants it) and should be treated accordingly. Techrights covered this many times. | Mar 05 02:06 |
| schestowitz[TR] | - Reddit should not shape our thinking or debate. This was also true over a decade ago. | Mar 05 02:06 |
| schestowitz[TR] | - re "that "security" has become its own religion in our times and should values clash it will most surely prevail." What we have is a parallel world of Fake Security, which includes back doors for states, and even worse anti-features. Then there's the worship of brands, basing the trust on brands rather than science (like how good a cipher is). | Mar 05 02:06 |
| schestowitz[TR] | - 'sadly' I did not find any typos | Mar 05 02:06 |
| schestowitz[TR] | - I enjoyed the article very much | Mar 05 02:06 |
| schestowitz[TR] | - do you want some refs regarding Reddit (for your personal needs, not article)? | Mar 05 02:06 |
| schestowitz[TR] | - re "To fire an employee for refusing to use a product on sincere moral grounds is reprehensible" - yes, see Sirius (the CEO has left, I learned last night!) http://techrights.org/wiki/index.php?title=Sirius_Open_Source&diff=17169&oldid=17166 | Mar 05 02:06 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-techrights.org | Sirius Open Source - Techrights | Mar 05 02:07 | |
| *XFaCE has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s) | Mar 05 03:01 | |
| *XFaCE (~XFaCE@uzfeivw9fp6ba.irc) has joined #techbytes | Mar 05 03:06 | |
| *Now talking on #techbytes | Mar 05 05:01 | |
| *Topic for #techbytes is: Welcome to the official channel of the TechBytes Audiocast | Mar 05 05:01 | |
| *Topic for #techbytes set by schestowitz!~roy@haii6za73zabc.irc at Tue Jun 1 20:21:34 2021 | Mar 05 05:01 | |
| *Now talking on #techbytes | Mar 05 05:01 | |
| *u-amarsh04 has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!) | Mar 05 10:05 | |
| *u-amarsh04 (~amarsh04@nqkitbgnqjad4.irc) has joined #techbytes | Mar 05 10:15 | |
| *psydroid2 (~psydroid@cbcfptirpkfqa.irc) has joined #techbytes | Mar 05 12:03 | |
| schestowitz[TR] | x https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/microsoft-co-founder-bill-gates-praises-indias-progress-in-various-sectors/article66579255.ece | Mar 05 13:11 |
| schestowitz[TR] | # bill sez | Mar 05 13:11 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-www.thehindu.com | Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates praises India's progress in various sectors - The Hindu | Mar 05 13:11 | |
| schestowitz[TR] | x https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/bill-gates-after-meet-with-pm-narendra-modi-more-optimistic-than-ever-about-india-3833659 | Mar 05 13:12 |
| schestowitz[TR] | # modi kissing up to bill | Mar 05 13:12 |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-www.ndtv.com | Bill Gates "More Optimistic Than Ever" About India After Meet With PM Modi | Mar 05 13:12 | |
| schestowitz[TR] | <li> | Mar 05 13:32 |
| schestowitz[TR] | <h5><a href="https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-South-Central/2023/0303/Not-worthy-of-a-democracy-Behind-India-s-slide-on-press-freedom">‘Not worthy of a democracy’: Behind India’s slide on press freedom</a></h5> | Mar 05 13:32 |
| schestowitz[TR] | <blockquote> | Mar 05 13:32 |
| schestowitz[TR] | <p>India does not have a spotless history of free speech, but experts say the journalism industry has never before faced such serious pressures on so many different fronts, including Mr. Modi’s populist leadership style, market consolidation, self-censorship, and weak legal protections for journalists.</p> | Mar 05 13:32 |
| schestowitz[TR] | <p>The result is India has fallen to the 150th rank out of 180 countries on the 2022 World Press Freedom Index and is described as “one of the world’s most dangerous countries for the media” in the accompanying report.</p> | Mar 05 13:32 |
| schestowitz[TR] | </blockquote> | Mar 05 13:32 |
| schestowitz[TR] | </li> | Mar 05 13:32 |
| schestowitz[TR] | Mar 05 13:32 | |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-From censorship to tax raids, India's free press faces growing threats - CSMonitor.com | Mar 05 13:32 | |
| schestowitz[TR] | <li> | Mar 05 13:34 |
| schestowitz[TR] | <h5><a href="https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/content-series/tech-at-the-leading-edge/the-us-national-cybersecurity-strategy-mark-up/">How will the US counter cyber threats? Our experts mark up the National Cybersecurity Strategy.</a></h5> | Mar 05 13:34 |
| schestowitz[TR] | <blockquote> | Mar 05 13:34 |
| schestowitz[TR] | <p>On March 2, the Biden administration released its 2023 National Cybersecurity Strategy, an attempt to chart a course through the stormy waters of cyberspace, where the private sector, peer-competitor states, and nonstate actors navigate around and with each other in ways growing more complex—and dangerous—by the day. The Atlantic Council’s Cyber Statecraft Initiative (CSI), which is h | Mar 05 13:34 |
| schestowitz[TR] | oused within the Digital Forensic Research Lab, gathered a group of experts from government and private-sector cyber backgrounds to dive into the document and leave their comments to help decipher what the administration is really saying.</p> | Mar 05 13:34 |
| schestowitz[TR] | </blockquote> | Mar 05 13:34 |
| schestowitz[TR] | </li> | Mar 05 13:34 |
| schestowitz[TR] | Mar 05 13:34 | |
| -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-www.atlanticcouncil.org | How will the US counter cyber threats? Our experts mark up the National Cybersecurity Strategy - Atlantic Council | Mar 05 13:34 | |
| schestowitz[TR] | "Request for Review (RfR) challenging the lack of reimbursement of the Lunch Time Supervision costs at the European School the Hague (ESH) | Mar 05 14:29 |
| schestowitz[TR] | Dear SUEPO members, dear colleagues, | Mar 05 14:29 |
| schestowitz[TR] | With regards to the Education and Childcare Reform, it is time for some of you to file yet another Request for Review (“RfR”) challenging the lack of reimbursement of the Lunch Time Supervision costs at the European School the Hague (“ESH”). Parents concerned have received an invoice from ESH for this specific cost, requested already the reimbursement to the Office and received a negative reply to their request." | Mar 05 14:29 |
| *scornproof has quit (Ping timeout: 120 seconds) | Mar 05 15:40 | |
| *psydroid2 has quit (connection closed) | Mar 05 21:08 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.6 | ䷉ find the plain text version at this address (HTTP) or in Gemini (how to use Gemini) with a full GemText version.