The background companies we go through here in the US aren’t “random people” and you sign a release of that information for them when they start that background check. So you’ve given them permission to access that info on you. I don’t know what HRs your dealing with but if it’s random hiring managers asking you then they have no idea what’s in a typical background check anyway.

Most big background check service companies are checking your criminal history directly with the court houses of where you’ve told them you’ve lived. Many will also verify your past employment directly with those companies as well. Depending on the company/job title they may also be checking your credit score/bankruptcy history or verifying degrees with universities as well. They don’t care about what data brokers have on you because they’re getting verification on things directly from official sources.

I don’t know if you’re worried that your too “locked down” privacy wise for a background check to clear? I wouldn’t worry because if you’re using your countries equivalent of a SSN and living “on the grid” but not online at all they’ll still be able to get the info they need/want anyway. I’ve had employees who didn’t even have emails or own phones/computers clear background.

You don’t get spousal support because someone was a sperms donor to you or had a short term affair with you. That’s not how spousal support works.

OK so Putin met with Kim Jung Un last year. He met with Xi Jinping yesterday. The article is about someone spying for Hong Kong which is in China. I must be missing something, the article didn’t mention Hong Kong?

Xi Jinping? Kim Jong Un is North Koreas Supreme leader.

I understood it to mean they were in radio contact after the crash. Why even mention radio contact from before the crash?

Not the person you were responding too but I’d love to learn more about these toys/tech. Are there some key words that would help me search? I’m having some trouble sifting through the search results.

If their issue is with latching then a bottles not gonna change that

Some babies have to be taught to nurse…

Trump already doesn’t listen to any voice but his own.

I think you missed his point.

A lot of nuts are very high water usage crops. It’s a gallon per almond but almost five for a walnut.

By Lemmy standards I’m perversely unconcerned with my privacy. But I just updated all my glassdoor info to wildly incorrect stuff (name, location, industry, job title, etc) then deleted it. Even for me this is a bridge too far.

What are the chances the upvotes are fake though?

It’s not the King, the Thai king is a useless playboy. It’s the Thai military who’ve held power for a decade. The Military Junta wants to dissolve their rival and are just trying to use the King as the excuse.

So it’s actually the Military that’s in charge of Thailands government. Its a constitutio al Monarchy much like England but the ruling government has been the Military for around 10 years now. The Kings mostly a figurehead just like King Charles. The last King of Thailand was so popular that he could significantly influence the people if he chose, the current King is largely seen as a useless playboy.

Thailand does have a lese majeste law which makes it illegal to insult the King. They are not the only country with such a law, ex. Germany has a similar law making it illegal to criticize the president (though it seems to be largely unused) and Denmark has a law preventing the ridicule of its Monarchs.

So it’s the Military that’s trying to oust an upstart civilian governmental party/movement. They seem to be using the lese majesty laws as an excuse to oust their rivals. I’m not sure just how effective it’ll be since the current King isn’t very well liked. Then again I’m sure they’re running their propaganda beside pictures of the late King who was beloved. Someone with closer ties to Thailand may be able to tell us how receptive people seem to be to this move.

Is that a Tardis blanket?

Overly simplified: It’s a term used to indicate that you should bet the stock is going down if you are a stock holder.

The family is Canadian

The US military (all branches) has just over 600 flag officers. If Russia has 1000 that’s still a massive difference between the loss rate. (.16% vs .9% or 139% difference) Also the US military also has logistics generals, not sure where you were going with that, could you please expand on it?

I’m not a numbers person so my math may be a tad wonky but that still looks like a significant impact.

If your just saying the army then the US has 218 as a max number of generals. 1 loss is almost .5% (.45%) of their numbers in 23 years. Russia lost almost 1% (.9%) in 2 years. At that pace in 23 years they should expect to lose almost 103 generals or over 10% of their flag officers.

That’s a rate of .5% of generals a year. The US is averaging that in 2 decades.

I don’t care how top heavy they are; 1% is an impactful amount of flag officers to lose in a year. Even if the impact is only to morale.