What lies behind the DIHK's demand for halving the basic apprentice salary and flexibilizing working hours becomes clear when you look at quotes from the DIHK chairman:
"My proposal is to introduce a nationwide basic remuneration of 270 euros," he told the newspaper "Die Welt". He justified his initiative by saying that this would allow more apprenticeships to be financed. "An apprenticeship remuneration of up to 800 euros is simply too high for many businesses."
"Working hours must be better adapted to the needs of the industries." It makes no sense that a 17-year-old restaurant specialist has to leave at 10 p.m. "if all the tables are still occupied."
This is simply about having cheap labor, but not about ensuring proper training. But these demands are not new.
And what the German economy thinks of training can be seen in the fact that the number of training positions has again decreased by 10% compared to the previous year - and thus young people have again been left without training positions, despite all the promises of the economy. Without a non-training fee for larger companies, this will not change either. But complaining that there are no trained skilled workers, the economy can do quite famously ...
No idea what the herb is called that he takes, but it leaves severe brain damage: Beckstein wants German Guantanamo. Apart from the fact that he also wants to shoot suspects in the head and pack foreigners into camps because potential terrorists must not be allowed to run around freely (politicians like him, who are completely crazy, are not only allowed to run around freely but also to express their opinions freely), he is also constitutionally hostile:
Beckstein also criticized the ruling of the Federal Constitutional Court, which in a ruling on Lower Saxony legislation had demanded clear limitations on preventive telephone surveillance. The balance between security and freedom of interests must be re-evaluated, said Beckstein: "That the intimate sphere of terrorists should be protected is for me hardly bearable."
I'm sorry, Mr. Beckstein, but you have failed the test. Because the Constitutional Court does not explicitly protect the intimate sphere of terrorists - but the intimate sphere of citizens. And this is listed in the Basic Law as a protected asset.
Why is someone like this not observed by the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution? His hostility to the constitution is really documented multiple times ...
And their considerations on the legal situation would - if they were to hold up in court - really deliver a significant blow to SCO.
The whole SCO-Linux movie is quite exciting, but quite honestly: the lengths between the action scenes are a bit exaggerated.
Astronomers have found a clump of mud outside Pluto's orbit that is at least as large, and likely even significantly larger than Pluto - Planet or Not, Pluto Now Has Far-Out Rival:
Astronomers announced yesterday that they had found a lump of rock and ice that was larger than Pluto and the farthest known object in the solar system. The discovery will probably rekindle debate over the definition of "planet" and whether Pluto still merits the designation.
Now it's about whether Pluto loses its planet status, or the new one also becomes a planet.
Who wants to work with PostgreSQL and Frontier, simply install the PostgreSQL Extension for Frontier. For Mac and Windows.
Under ISS takes action against publication of Cisco vulnerability talk you can find a description of how Cisco and ISS envision security: massive interference with the freedom of expression of a speaker at the Black-Hat conference. Okay, he was a former ISS employee and probably used information he shouldn't have published - but it's exactly this ridiculous secrecy that undermines security - because attackers will gain this knowledge sooner or later - if security vulnerabilities exist, they will be found sooner or later. If someone reports about it publicly, at least you can defend yourself and take countermeasures. If the publication is suppressed, the end user is ultimately the victim - who has no chance to protect themselves - and even in an emergency by switching to another router manufacturer.
Therefore, it is indeed the case: neither ISS nor Cisco make a good impression in the public eye. On the contrary, their censorship attempts are actually only another argument in future product decisions to decide against Cisco - because you can obviously not trust their security statements.