Article says the erroneous menus weren't distributed. So, probably not.

Removing the allergen warning is basically some form of attempted manslaughter.

Good point about correlation, entirety possible the depressed and anxious people may tend to increase screen use.

Rube flag?

Without disputing that there were a lot of fuckups, this feels like a kind of pointless article given the uncle called 10 minutes after the shooter was shot by police, not sure there was much he could have done at that point.

I'm not sure why light would matter, obviously if you're flying you'd use wind over solar, there's so much wind flowing around the planes it'd be a much more available and reliable source of power.

/s

I prefer the "Darth Jar Jar" and "The Bloop" levels of conspiracy theories.

This isn't early access, it's advanced access, like if a game has a deluxe edition that lets people play a few days before the official release.

If only employers cared. It has been nice, now my employer is rolling out a arbitrary but mandatory 4 days return to office policy. In like 8 years of employment I never needed to be there that much. Whatever, 100% remote job market looks decent for me, hopefully find a better place soon.

I was a manager at a big bank. They were having problems with attrition, so every manager had to doing a dumb HR class about retention. During the class, they asked us how we thought we could improve the retention rate. My immediate response was pay more and drop their policy of focusing on paying bonuses over giving raises. The HR person was dumbfounded and we spent the whole time talking about trust exercises...

Seems like kind of a straw that broke the camel's back situation.

A company sent them a one-of-a-kind prototype cooling device and the video card it was designed for to have it reviewed or whatever. The reviewer misplaced the GPU but was under deadline to produce their video, so they used a different video card, and the cooler (as should be expected) didn't function well, but they posted the negative review anyway. After the fuckup was pointed out, they put a very easy to miss "correction" on the video. People caught on that this happens alot, and started to question the value of the content, given so many mistakes and easily missed corrections. This also extended to people questioning the bias of their reviews on products related to companies they have partnerships with or competing brands.

Additionally, despite being asked to return the device and agreeing to do so, they later sold it at a charity auction. This measurably harmed the creator and it is unknown who purchased it (people speculate it was a competitor), apparently some compensation was worked out however.

Last I've seen, the former social media manager posted a pretty scathing recounting of time at the company. It included alot of events that indicate this was a predatory and hostile work environment, including sexual harassment.