Starting with v1.98 on desktop, Brave removes hidden identifiers that Meta adds to your photos on Instagram and Facebook.
This makes it harder for Meta to link the same photo across accounts and sites.
Jak Indové lžou - a jak postupně ničí korporáty
Pojďme si to ukázat na jednom příkladu pána, který je vysoce motivovaný se přestěhovat do ČR.
Nyní zveřejnil příspěvek, na obrázku níže, že hledá práci na manažerskou pozici do luxusního hotelu nebo korporátu corporate hospitality roles) - samozřejmě napsaný tak, aby v něm napřímo nemusel uvést žádné reálné zkušenosti.
Jenže jaksi zapomněl vymazat původní příspěvky ze začátku roku, kde hledá práci jako kuchař indické, thajské a čínské kuchyně, se zkušenostmi ze světa - nicméně od roku 2018 je sous chef v Indii.
Zdá se to jako drobnost, ale tohle je v jejich kultuře typické a je to velký problém do budoucna.
Toto ohýbání reality (=lež) aby se dostali na jakoukoliv vyšší pozici i když s ní nemají žádné zkušenosti a ani k ní žádné předpoklady je naprosto typický kulturní rys.
V korporátech to většinou dopadá tak, že relativně brzy se projeví jejich nekompetence - ale jejich hádavá povaha, kdy za žádnou cenu nenechají chybu na sobě vede k tomu, že jejich práci si postupně rozdělí zbytek týmu - jen aby splnili plán a Ind jim tam nevnášel další chyby, které se těžko odhalují a všechny okolo zpomaluje.
Takže takový Ind v korporátu vydrží roky, nemá úplně moc práce (nicméně VŽDYCKY má spoustu práce a nemá vůbec čas) a postupně se dostává na vyšší pozice.
Ve chvíli kdy je na manažerské pozici - už nabírá jen a pouze další Indy - kteří fungují stejně a proces se zrychluje.
Ohýbání reality (=lhaní), je v jejich kultuře naprosto běžná věc, která slouží jen k tomu dostat to co chtějí a kam chtějí. Navíc další společný rys je jejich přesvědčení o vlastních schopnostech a to, že jsou naprosto nejlepší pro danou pozici - bez jakékoliv sebereflexe a vnímání reality.
Ze stejného důvodu také vnímají Indii jako naprosto skvělou zemi - kdo tam kdy byl - může si hlavu ukroutit...
Tohle je jen špička ledovce a nás to čeká, pokud se vláda nevzdá plánů na to ještě více jim k nám více otevřít cestu.
Což by také ve svém zájmu neměli dělat, protože Indové ve všech hostitelských zemí mají extrémní snahu se dostat i do státní správy a na rozhodovací pozice - naprosto v souladu s jejich přesvědčením o vlastních schopnostech.
Jasně u nás to kvůli češtině zatím nehrozí, ale to se změní během 5-10 let.
Nedělejme tuhle chybu v ČR - já v jednom takovém korporátu jsem a popisuji zde své zkušenosti.
U Filipínců je to trošku jinak, ale s podobným dopadem - to rozeberu někdy příště.
Wuthering Waves | Resonator Showcase | Lily — FORGET FEAR
"At least this way… I can save one life."
Follow @Wuthering_Waves and repost. 10 winners will be chosen for a $50 Amazon Gift Card.
#WutheringWaves#Lily
@dmichaelclary At this point, these articles have become predictable.
1 Take something good that brings God praise.
2 Make it an idol to avoid.
3 Denounce the idol and add an extra-biblical, culturally-sensitive practice.
A journalist from The Times, having recently interviewed my wife, concluded that homemaking mothers like her, who raise their children at home and submit to their husbands, are participating in a system of "prostitution".
Too few in our society understand just how destructive and delusional feminism really is, and just how influential it has been upon the dismantling of Christian civilization in nations like ours.
At one time, the standard for a successful, godly, and fruitful life for a woman would have been precisely that of a homemaking mother. That was the standard of honour. Now it has become the standard of shame for the many deluded women who have chosen instead that being an unmarried, childless corporate bot or ladder-climbing boss babe in your forties is "liberation".
Feminism is not only delusional, it is misogynistic. It does not have women's best interests at heart and it will be too late for most of them before they realise they were lied to too.
Pray for these sophisticatedly deluded women, and for any who continue to be taken in by the lying witchcraft that attempts to convince people that good is "bad", that light is "dark", that godly mothers are "prostitutes".
@canonpress@douglaswils@iamjohnoliver John Oliver is not funny, and the fact that people still watch his show is yet another sign of societal decay. That being said, it is good that Pastor Wilson's teachings trigger these people.
No DNA.
No CCTV.
No forensic evidence.
Just witness testimony.
10 years and 6 months.
This is not justice.
This is a corrupt 2 tier system making an example of a man who spoke out against them.
The same system that protected the perpetrators of the grooming gangs, ignored the victims and arrest innocent citizens for posting their opinions online.
So many of you have been asking me for this…And I thought, why stop at one?
Let's do 🎁 5 giveaways (Xiaomi 18 Pro Series phones and wearables)
First one drops tomorrow!
Repost this. Your friends will thank you later.
I for one am glad Christians outlawed human sacrifice and forced unregenerate people to behave more morally.
In fact, I think it was actually obedient to the second greatest commandment (and the first).
I really didn't want to do this, but you raised the stakes to this level...🤦🏾♂️
This statement is a poorly polished, snagged tooth rhetorical move, and a theological house of cards that collapses under its own weight once you look at the text.
Peter’s sword in Gethsemane was wrong for a very specific reason. Jesus rebukes him not with a general “earthly power is always the enemy of the gospel,” but with the necessity of the cross itself:
•“Shall I not drink the cup that the Father has given me?” (John 18:11)
•“How then should the Scriptures be fulfilled, that it must be so?” (Matt. 26:54)
•“Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will at once send me more than twelve legions of angels?” (Matt. 26:53)
Peter was trying to interrupt the redemptive plan. The arrest was the doorway to the atonement. That is not a transferable principle that any use of earthly power by Christians puts something ahead of the cross. It is a unique moment in redemptive history. Treating it as a blanket prohibition on political engagement, just laws, or Christian influence in a nation’s life is a category error.
Your statement also runs on a strawman of what most people mean by “Christian Nationalism.” It assumes the position is “use the sword (or the state) to stop or replace the work of the cross.” That is not the actual argument of serious versions of this view.
The usual claim is narrower: nations exist under God, the magistrate bears the sword for justice (Rom. 13), and a people may rightly order their public life in ways that acknowledge the moral order God has revealed rather than pretending the state is religiously neutral. That is not the same thing as Peter swinging his sword to keep Jesus off the cross.
Jesus himself distinguished the means of his kingdom’s advance in that hour from the ordinary role of civil authority. He told the disciples to buy swords earlier that night (Luke 22:36), then forbade their use in Gethsemane because the time and purpose were wrong.
The sword has a place; it just did not have a place in opposing the cup.
Romans 13 still stands: the civil authority is God’s servant, and it does not bear the sword in vain. Collapsing those distinctions into any earthly power undermines the gospel is not careful theology; it is a slogan.
I do believe there is temptation to put power ahead of the cross. It is real.
But so is the opposite temptation: to spiritualize the public square into irrelevance and call the resulting silence faithfulness.
This argument only works if you define every form of Christian political engagement as the first temptation and then cite Gethsemane as proof.
That is why it feels artful and still reads as a strawman once the actual text and the actual claim are on the table.
Most people using the term are arguing about the magistrate’s role under God, the legitimacy of moral order in public law, or the possibility that a people may acknowledge the Christian heritage that shaped their institutions. They are not claiming the state should swing a sword at Malchus to keep the Messiah off the cross. Or assume the sword over the gospel. Equating the two is either willful misrepresentation or an inability to distinguish basic categories.
What makes it especially poor is that this comes from circles that advertise themselves as rigorous about exegesis and rhetoric. This move is neither. It is a slogan that borrows the emotional force of the cross while ignoring the actual teaching of the passage, the rest of the New Testament’s treatment of civil authority (Rom. 13), and the distinction Jesus himself draws between the means of his kingdom in that hour and the ordinary function of the sword.
This statement is not profound. It is lazy, and the pretension to care makes the laziness more obvious.