101–110 of 507 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Alternatively, it's a warning to employees on how they might get caught.
Once again for those in the back, never use your employer's equipment or network for anything you don't want them to see!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Alternatively, it's a warning to employees on how they might get caught.
Once again for those in the back, never use your employer's equipment or network for anything you don't want them to see!
(SV reference)
I just attempted to look at the reviews. There's an uncloseable pop-up telling you to log in. Normally I wouldn't bother, but curiousity got the best of me - I logged in with my Google OAuth. Not so fast - you haven't contributed to Glassdoor in the last 12 months, here's another annoying pop up and you cannot dismiss it until you do. Does anyone actually bother to use this dark pattern infused service?
There needs to be a non-profit version of this without all the desperate bullshit.
Once had a contract where my client wanted me to do "security work", which was initially meant to be for pentesting their clients, but it turned into me building their wifi auth system. At some point in the gig, one of their clients went to them asking them if it was possible to de-anonymize someone glassdoor review since someone still-employed worked with them. They then went to me to see if I could do it for them.…
It might be possible to do linguistic analysis (ie. What they did to catch the Unabomber) to compare the language they used in the review vs how someone usually write in things like performance reviews, manager evaluations, emails, etc
Once had a contract where my client wanted me to do "security work", which was initially meant to be for pentesting their clients, but it turned into me building their wifi auth system. At some point in the gig, one of their clients went to them asking them if it was possible to de-anonymize someone glassdoor review since someone still-employed worked with them. They then went to me to see if I could do it for them.…
> Zuru hasn't simply alleged that it suffered a loss; Zuru’s cofounders declared, under penalty of perjury, that because of the negative reviews, Zuru had to spend more money to recruit job candidates for a particular position. ” Does Zuru have proof it's because of negative reviews and not other causes?
Their proof (or lack thereof) would generally be evaluated at the trial stage. This is a pre-trial procedure, so it's mostly take at face value. If another party so moves, they could ask the court to stop the plaintiff, and the judge will make a decision. But that's not automatic--somebody has to specifically ask for it.
I just attempted to look at the reviews. There's an uncloseable pop-up telling you to log in. Normally I wouldn't bother, but curiousity got the best of me - I logged in with my Google OAuth. Not so fast - you haven't contributed to Glassdoor in the last 12 months, here's another annoying pop up and you cannot dismiss it until you do. Does anyone actually bother to use this dark pattern infused service?
There needs to be a non-profit version of this without all the desperate bullshit.
That CPO soon moved on.
Contact us page for Zuru Toys. I just sent them a short message explaining that previously I was not aware of their company but now this issue is the only thing that I know about them and it is not a good look. https://zurutoys.co/contact/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Does Glassdoor actually have any business operations or webservers in NZ that are subject to this order? The court order itself is from a california court. They can't just tell that court to fuck off.
But why is a US court telling Glassdoor to do something because of a New Zealand law?