I mean, I probably wouldn't have be making so much comments criticizing the government if it weren't for the fact that I have citizenship. Probably wouldn't even dare to make a Lemmy account.

They are basically two questions, but kind of related, so asking in same post

1. What is the normal notice period in US when resigning? And is it an issue if a company is asking for more than couple of months of notice period?

2. What is the legal value of non-compete clause in that agreement? That you will not work in the same industry for a set period of time after leaving the company. For example, if you are a software developer working at Netflix, you won't work on any other streaming service / application for set amount of time after quitting / leaving the job.

Cuz other countries have it...

I remember NYC. I was always afraid of falling in the tracks lol.

Edit: Reworded the question

Sometimes I feel like I'm the only person who does not like ranch flavoring. To a lesser degree, I don't like apple pie either. Like, if I was served a slice of apple pie and courtesy required me to at least eat a few bites, I would. But I would absolutely not if it was a dish, say, covered in ranch dressing.

I linked to the Oversight Committee's press release and it says there are 20,000 documents they released. I can't find a link to any of the documents besides the 3 included in the press release. Are they for lawyers and press only?

i read that "democrats won everything", but i only understood it as a NYC election where Zohran Mamdani won the post of mayor.

which political elections have happened and which are upcoming?

Pumpkin patches? Apple orchards? Snuggling under a blanket and refusing to come out until spring?

Do you have employer match or anything that helps motivate you to contribute?

Why or why not? If you aren't, what are you doing instead?

Because I'm Asian and I can remember like at least 10 instances where people in the US (Including Both White and Black people) would assume I don't speak English before I had a chance to talk. I've lived in this country since 8, I speak on a native level. I wonder if there is just a subconcious "perpetual foreigner" stereotype engrained into people.

Because I sometimes feel uncomfortable. Like it just feels very awkward after I get asked that, then I speak English perfectly lol.

Either in regards to the current political situation, or for other reasons. What drew you to the idea of living in another country? Do you think whatever benefits it offers are really worth it, or is the grass just greener on the other side of the fence?

Political discussion can often end up in a shitshow that creates a huge moderation headache. I enjoy not having to worry about doing much moderation, but that's also resulted in a community that's not particularly active.

What are you getting out of this community? Would it be better to allow for overt political discussion?

The US has a lot of places that are car-dependent. You can live in walkable areas, but those can also have much higher cost of living. Where did you end up on that spectrum for where you live right now?

Because that's what my mother claims and I'm not sure if that's her distorted perspective, since I heard that doctors where I was from were currupt and would get paid money if they prescribe a certain medication, which is likely the reason why there is a huge distrust in medications amongst my family.

My mother keep citing anecdotal evidence, like how one of my relatives got diagsnosed with depression and refused to take medication and "they got over" their depression, and keeps telling me medication is bad.

We came from mainland China, btw.

Is this a thing in the US? Are doctors just as evil/corrupt?

cross-posted from: https://infosec.pub/post/34652626

I recently read New Bill Would Give Marco Rubio “Thought Police” Power to Revoke U.S. Passports and I wanted to read the actual amendment to the Passport Act of 1926 for myself and I thought some others might also.

I have reformatted it for markdown with hyperlinks from law.cornell.edu to laws that the amendment referenced. So that it is easier to read and cross-reference. Let me know if I made any formatting mistakes.

I want to hear everyone's thought on this.

Right now, the bill is still in committe which means that it will either be cancelled (tabled), amended further, or approved (reported). If approved, the bill will be voted on by the House and then the Senate.

Could something like this reclassify dissidents as terrorists? Maybe allow for any and all naturalized citizens to be sent to a concentration camp? Could anyone who sent political aid to the Democrats be considered a terrorist? Like what could the reprecussions be and how far might they go?

H.R. 5300, page 43

SEC. 226. NO PASSPORTS FOR TERRORISTS AND TRAFFICKERS.

The Act entitled "An Act to regulate the issue and validity of passports, and for other purposes’’, approved July 3, 1926 (22 U.S.C. 211a et seq.), commonly known as the "Passport Act of 1926’’, is amended by adding at the end the following:

"SEC. 4. AUTHORITY TO DENY OR REVOKE PASSPORT TO INDIVIDUALS PROVIDING MATERIAL SUPPORT FOR TERRORISM.

• "(a) INELIGIBILITY.—
  • "(1) ISSUANCE.—Subject to subsection (b), the Secretary of State shall refuse to issue a passport to any individual who—
    • "(A) has been charged with or convicted of a violation of section 2339A or 2339B of title 18, United States Code; or
    • "(B) the Secretary determines has knowingly aided, assisted, abetted, or otherwise provided material support to an organization the Secretary has designated as a foreign terrorist organization pursuant to section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1189).
  • "(2) REVOCATION.—The Secretary of State shall, except as provided in paragraph (3)(A), revoke a passport previously issued to any individual described in paragraph (1).
  • "(3) EXCEPTIONS.—
    • "(A) RETURN TO THE UNITED STATES.— In order to facilitate the return of an individual described in paragraph (1) to the United States, the Secretary of State may limit a previously issued passport or passport card only for return travel to the United States, or may issue a limited passport or passport card that only permits return travel to the United States, prior to revocation under paragraph (2).
    • "(B) HUMANITARIAN AND EMERGENCY WAIVER.—The Secretary of State may issue a passport to an individual otherwise ineligible for such passport or subject to revocation of such passport under this subsection if the Secretary determines that emergency circumstances or humanitarian needs apply.
• "(b) RIGHT OF REVIEW.—Any individual who, in accordance with this section, is denied issuance of a passport by the Secretary of State, or whose passport is revoked by the Secretary, may request a hearing to appeal such denial or revocation not later than 60 days after receiving notice of such denial or revocation.
• "(c) RIGHT OF RESTORATION.—In the event that an individual described in paragraph (1) demonstrates during a hearing described in subsection (b) that the individual has been acquitted of an act described in that paragraph, or the Secretary otherwise changes a determination described in subparagraph (B) of such paragraph, the Secretary may reissue a passport to such individual.
• "(d) REPORT.—
  • "(1) IN GENERAL.—If the Secretary of State refuses to issue or revokes a passport pursuant to subsection (a), or if, subsequent to a hearing pursuant to subsection (b), the Secretary issues or cancels a revocation of a passport that was the subject of such a hearing, the Secretary shall, not later than 30 days after such refusal or revocation, or such issuance or cancellation, submit to the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate a report on such refusal, revocation, issuance, or cancellation, as the case may be.
  • "(2) FORM.—The report submitted under paragraph (1) may be submitted in classified or unclassified form.
• "(e) DEFINITIONS.—In this section—
  • "(1) the term ‘passport’ includes a passport card; and
  • "(2) the term ‘material support’ means the provision of any property, tangible or intangible, or service—
    • "(A) including currency or monetary instruments or financial securities, financial services, lodging, training, expert advice or assistance, safehouses, false documentation or identification, communications equipment, facilities, weapons, lethal substances, explosives, personnel (one or more individuals who may be or include oneself), and transportation; and
    • "(B) excluding medicine or religious materials.
• "(f) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section may be construed—
  • "(1) or applied so as to abridge the exercise of rights guaranteed under the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States; or
  • "(2) to limit the Secretary’s ability to revoke a passport.
• "(g) SEVERABILITY.—If any provision of this section or the application of such provision is held by a Federal court to be unconstitutional, the remainder of this section and the application of such provisions to any other person or circumstance shall not be affected.’’.

I hope everyone is taking appropriate steps to self-care!? As the image shows, drink some boba, or read a good book, watch a good TV program or play a game, enjoy your life as much as you can. The world can burn some other week, but this week was not that one! 😊

Good? Bad? If it was bad, may the knowledge that today is World Cat Day provide you some cheer

Context, I’m a liberal, who’s voted Democratic every election I’ve been able to.

I’ve constantly see you guys complain and bash Democratic politicians pretty much since the rise of populism with Sanders in 2016.

I just want to know if populism is so great and Democrats are out of touch, and if you ran on just economic populism, and ignore social issues (which the right won’t), you’d easily win every election right? So by that logic, gaining massive support from all sides of the political spectrum should be easy right? Everyone says it’s all about messaging and vibes. And the Dems are failing at both, so wouldn’t right now be the best time to seriously back a fully populist leftist party? If a majority of the country polls high for Medicare for All, by proxy, they should vote for the candidates promising that, and they don’t talk about social issues that might scare off right wingers willing to vote for them.

I just don’t understand the mindset of constantly infighting with us liberals and protest voting hurting our causes. Just start your own party and beat us within YOUR system. We’ll never fully drop social issues, so we’ll never win a fair amount of conservatives, but you guys can.

Hopefully it's going well. If not, hopefully you can accept the love of Cookie Monster into your heart.

Trump's administration is, of course, trying to speedrun Idiocracy. I think too many people won't care until their daily life is impacted though. When they go to the store and they're out of beans, or can't get a new gas guzzling truck because the price doubled. What ICE is doing is terrible, but concentration camps are someone else's problem, somewhere far away, if you don't want to care about them.

I'm wondering where we are on that track. When you want to do something you've always done, but you just can't anymore. When even MAGAts can't pretend that things aren't worse.

I can think of one: food.

That's pretty much all I can come up with.

Trump supporters have gone down the path that I and many others believe is irredeemable. I wanted to ask the Americans here what they think will happen to trump supporters in a post trump America. Do you think there will be an offramp for them if so what do they need to do to make amends?