This is not the case in Europe. You would not gain anything by being a doctor from the US vs the local ones. You may even be in a worse position due to many differences between the US and the host country.
It's a good idea to ask a few AIs to get extra feedback. They may be wrong, your doctor may be wrong -- it is better to have a set of inputs and, to some point, check it against sources.
Free has ipv6 enabled on 100% of their customers, and while sometimes their software has a few issues, it's working perfectly fine. People just get pissy because Free refuses to pay for peering with Google for e.g. Youtube, and it feels slower, even more on v6.
The only ISP not putting out v6 widely is SFR, and thankfully they've gone bankrupt and we will be rid of this scourge.
I am on Free (after a few years with Orange because Free could not bother to provide fiber here) but I am considering switching to Bouygues because I pay too much for the connection.
The connection is solid, though - thus my lack of enthusiasm.
I've been on SFR and had IPv6 for a decade at this point (through multiple moves and on mobile). It's been absolutely reliable in every way.
One of the huge holdups for v6 deployment was the absorbtion of the then DOCSIS2-based Numericable, which required a huge migration to DOCSIS3 to even support it, as well as integration of the whole network backhaul that came with it.
The reputation _was_ justified at some point far back but they turned the ship around a long time ago and is now entirely an unjustified meme.
These past years it's been SFR (via RED) who was keeping the prices competitive, so I can't wait to see the remaining three vultures collude to raise the prices back up again /s.
> People just get pissy because Free refuses to pay for peering with Google for e.g. Youtube, and it feels slower, even more on v6.
Well when one's paying for a heavily marketed "the fastest around" 1Gbps+ connection or something, and it indeed negotiates the link at that, but one can't play a 720p video over that tube because backhaul routing sucks, one has a right to be annoyed.
There are countries such as France that request plenty of nonsensical handwriting with some weird also handwritten formulas. This comes from the times where graphology was a big thing in France (you would usually be required to send a handwritten letter of motivation).
Poland is also strong on that, requiring "readable handwritten signatures".
This will end when the dinosaurs that still feel it is important go away.
I don't know how the law works in the US, but isn't the selling by C illegal and moot? C accepted the conditions, but did not repect them.
Shouldn't C be attacked (legally of course) automatically?
Say C decides to build on a land they own a nuclear plant with known life endengering issues. Or a place to publicly hang people. Or other completely illegal things. They will surely be stopped by someone (the state?) from doing this? Automatically, that is without the need for a citizen to raise the point.
This is a similar case: they want to do something illegal (not follow what they ageed to)
In Europe, generally speaking, you have unions that are formed within the company, usually as a representative of a national one (but you can also have local ones). They get elected to represent the employees and whatever they bargain is for all employees. Maybe 1% of employees are actually part of a union.
In the US it seems that you have to be a member of a union to get what they bargain? And they companies can block the creation of a union?
My IBEW (electricians' union) experience was regional, tied to where I lived; private companies can then choose whether to be a union shop, or not.
Certain contracts do or do not require using a union shop, but Bacon Act makes it so that tradesmen don't necessarily have to be IBEW members to receive the same wages, but most choose Union.
----
My thought proposition, in conversation, is usually something along the lines of: why would companies spend so much money campaigning against union organizers if it didn't have a multi-billion dollar return (i.e. more).
Thank you for the information. Over here this is completely regulated and companies do not have any choice in which unions are formed and they cannot make any attemptes to prevent unions. They also have to indirectly subidiase them :)
Everyday employees usually learn about unions though leflets they provide from tim to time, with a mot more information around elections for the company representative body.
One an agreement is in place with the company (which must be above whatthe law requires) then it is binding for everyone, unionized or not.
To be clear: US employees may attempt to organize at any company, but most "union shops" have chosen to use IBEW labor, as it gives them access to larger commercial/govt/industrial projects (depending upon region/jurisdiction).
Non-union shops will typically spend significant funds dissuading "organizing" among the employees, but there are many rules which technically prevent certain actions.
It is still commonly misunderstood that US employees cannot legally discuss their wage/compensation, when there is Federal Law which specifically allows discussion$.
Compare this to cows or horses - where the baby is of sizeable size, but goes statistically smoothly.
reply