Well, from the other side Jeff got the rest for being her spouse. They were married before Amazon was founded, so they were involved in that as a couple. And she also left job and moved for founding Amazon.
Ha, you "went ape" when someone saw as negative wearing a suit and you're doing the same in reverse.
Bradley speaking, if you go to interview for lawyer position you wear suit, if you go to interview for developer position you don't wear a suit.
Then the law should be about making it clear status of the restaurant. Just forbidding everything seems like wide sweep action that can stifle a lot of other good/innovative business models. Not something government should do.
It is far more unpredictable to litigate based on intent and public perception.
If an app displays a phone number but doesn’t say it belongs to the restaurant, is that making the current partnership clear or unclear? It’s a question left to precedent, which means there is a chance the legislation would not have teeth.
Instead of throwing restaurant owners into that mess, the new law we have today forbids a specific set of provable behaviors.
All the law has to say is that the delivery service must note next to their restaurant advertisement that they are not affiliated with or an agent of that restaurant.
Considering that the original virus has this protein as well, I think getting the illness still will be worse. And in vaccine they can control amount of proteins produced. And they can check a lot of things before even hitting human trials, so risk should be minimal.
Did you see that graph with amount of cases in control/vaccine groups? Where around day 10 vaccine group graph shows massive drop. It looks pretty convincing. And by now they have much more data, especially with lots of cases nowadays. That simple move can save thousands of live and I think worth considering, instead of just ignoring everything.
I just reviewed it and somehow I missed that detail that the inflection point was way before the second vaccine on the first reading. Very interesting.
Exactly, I'm baffled by this as well. It's a simple and clear way to save many more lives and nobody even discussing this. It's also much easier to administer since you don't need to coordinate second visit. I don't understand why it wasn't part of the trial (some portion of people just get 1 dose)
That's hard to believe in multi million city there was not enough people to fill on one center. Maybe there was something other preventing people from going there? Do you have source?
I found it hard to believe as well, but found [1]. Not living there at this time, I lack a sense of current sentiment, but it's my understanding that so far only medical personal is being vaccinated. Allegedly there was a lack of interest of being vaccinated right now (it's Christmas season and many are on holiday there I think). That'll change in a few days.
As far as I was able to connect the pieces the organization was a total disaster. Mobile teams going into nursing homes do not vaccinate the people working there. These people should have come to the center, but could not because the were working at that time. Other elderly people (not living in nursing homes) should have come to the center but did not receive the invitation in time.
This kind of utter incompetence is, sadly, quite typical in Berlin.
