I don't. Because there are dozens if not hundreds that match the description.
I once did an even more extreme version of this. I showed up with a contract for a new job that would give me a 30% raise and an opportunity to work from home as much as I want. I told my boss to match that offer or I would sign it.
He took a few days to decide and made me an offer that was significantly worse, so now I have a new job, more money and haven’t seen the inside of a corporate office in months. My old team has been completely dissolved because the old crew left faster than they could train replacements.
I don’t see any AI, just a list that got sorted alphabetically when it shouldn’t have been.
That's four screens total. You're first on the chopping block.
That using 100% free and open source software is more important than actually getting your work done.
In a thread about Affinity Photo where someone insisted that we should all use gimp and just not edit photos if gimp doesn't have the features we need rather than asking Serif to port their software to Linux.
Also in several threads about migrating from Windows to Linux where every missing or complicated feature was brushed away with "just get used to not being able to do it, even if it's critical to your workflow".
As we said back in university: "If we have too few women in our field, we will make our own."
Surprisingly, yes, I do. Cucumber is a testing tool ~~for ruby applications~~ for a whole lot of programming languages.
My old manager sent out invitations to the bride‘s family before telling me I was the groom.
(he publicly announced the new product‘s price and release date before telling the dev team that there will be a new product)
The expectation that people in office jobs can be productive for 8 hours per day.
Anyone upset that xkcd is supporting Harris probably hasn't been paying attention for the last 19 years. I wonder if this header image is a foreshadowing for XKCD 3000 (!) tomorrow.
I feel like a lot of answers here are dancing around why people find it offensive without really addressing it.
As an adjective "female" is completely fine to distinguish between genders when applied to humans. As in "a female athlete" or when a form asks you to select "male" or "female" (ideally with additional options "diverse" and "prefer not to answer").
Where it's problematic is when it's used as a noun. In English "a male" and "a female" is almost exclusively reserved for animals. For humans we have "a man" and "a woman". Calling a person "a female" is often considered offensive because it carries the implication of women being either animals, property or at least so extremely different from the speaker that they don't consider them equal. This impression is reinforced by the fact that the trend of calling women "females" is popular with self-proclaimed "nice guys" who blame women for not wanting to date them when in reality it's their own behavior (for example calling women "females") that drives potential partners away.
So in itself, the word "female" is just as valid as "male" and in some contexts definitely the right word to use but the way it has been used gives it a certain negative connotation.
Might be that they ordered online and the food is done before they get there?