Valid and Latest killexams 2B0-202 test prep

A lot of men and women when fall short ES Net Sight Atlas exam, do not really attempt again. We all recommend you in order to get our 2B0-202 test questions and solutions with VCE exercise test and test once more plus you will obtain the highest marks within 2B0-202 exam. That can be guaranteed. We supply updated, valid plus latest 2B0-202 Practice Test.

Exam Code: 2B0-202 Practice test 2022 by team
ES Net Sight Atlas
Enterasys Sight information search
Killexams : Enterasys Sight information search - BingNews Search results Killexams : Enterasys Sight information search - BingNews Killexams : The Quiet Invasion of 'Big Information'

When people worry about their data privacy, they usually focus on the Big Five tech companies: Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon, and Microsoft. Legislators have brought Facebook’s CEO to the capitol to testify about the ways the company uses personal data. The FTC has sued Google for violating laws meant to protect children’s privacy. Each of the tech companies is followed by a bevy of reporters eager to investigate how it uses technology to surveil us. But when Congress got close to passing data privacy legislation, it wasn’t the Big Five that led the most urgent effort to prevent the law from passing, it was a company called RELX.

You might not be familiar with RELX, but it knows all about you. Reed Elsevier LexisNexis (RELX) is a Frankensteinian amalgam of publishers and data brokers, stitched together into a single information giant. There is one other company that compares to RELX—Thomson Reuters, which is also an amalgamation of hundreds of smaller publishers and data services. Together, the two companies have amassed thousands of academic publications and business profiles, millions of data dossiers containing our personal information, and the entire corpus of US law. These companies are a culmination of the kind of information market consolidation that’s happening across media industries, from music and newspapers to book publishing. However, RELX and Thomson Reuters are uniquely creepy as media companies that don’t just publish content but also sell our personal data.

Despite being a billion-dollar data and information business—just one of RELX’s brands, alone, has profit margins that rival Apple, Google, and Amazon’s—RELX doesn’t get the same level of public scrutiny that those other companies do. It’s likely easier for most of us to ignore RELX and its industry counterparts than it is to ignore the social media and online shopping platforms that we use every day. We visit the Big Five companies’ platforms whenever we want to read the news, catch up with friends, shop, or look something up. Most of us don’t have such an intimate user relationship with RELX, even if we do legal research on Lexis, read Elsevier journals, or use LexisNexis personal data services at work. Even if you don’t feel like you have close, personal ties to RELX, one of the company’s dossiers probably has your name on it—and that information may be used to make decisions about your everyday life.

On one end of the informational spectrum, companies like RELX exploit a lack of data privacy laws to make millions of dollars building data products to sell to cops, your employer, your landlords, your insurance companies, and all sorts of other institutions and overlords. These companies and institutions use RELX’s “risk” products to make decisions about whether you should get hired for a job, have custody of your children, have access to certain types of medication, and even whether you will be detained or arrested. RELX’s LexisNexis products have helped the government spy on protesters’ social media accounts and surveil immigrants. Police have abused LexisNexis systems to spy on exes and even to blackmail women using the personal information the company’s policing products provide. Using RELX products for data surveillance is problematic because the company funnels a deluge of unfiltered, unvetted data through biased data-processing algorithms. The combination of bad data and bad algorithms leads to government systems that bake historically racist, xenophobic policing practices and outcomes into a Minority Report-like digital policing dystopia.

The companies’ error-riddled data has prevented people from accessing their own bank accounts and getting insurance, and from being able to rent homes. The mistakes in RELX’s data make it all the more worrisome. RELX is growing its list of data analytics products, and is even developing technology that makes predictions about your health based on your private medical records, assessing your health risks for insurers and your doctors. Imagine what could happen to your health care access if you were wrongly tagged as at risk for opioid abuse or as having a certain chronic illness.

The companies can “double-dip” with their data assets, selling raw data and also selling structured information made from that raw data. For instance, RELX’s Elsevier sells academic journal articles, and it also creates research “metrics” products with data gathered by tracking the activities and associations of its authors, and also by surveilling who is accessing articles and what they’re doing with them. These metrics products predict which researchers, and which research projects, will have the most “impact.” Such rankings help grant funders divvy out money and institutions decide which hires will make them appear the most prestigious. Academic metrics take scientific decisions out of the hands of scientists whose expertise should lead scientific decisionmaking. They also turn universities and grant funders into rich data sources for the analytics companies.

Tue, 08 Nov 2022 23:59:00 -0600 en-US text/html
Killexams : New Google feature lets you scrub personal information from search results

(KTLA) — A quick online search can reveal personal details on just about anyone.

“It’s just so much easier to find on the internet, and it is a huge invasion of privacy,” said Hayley Kaplan, a cyber security expert.

Now, a new tool from Google seeks to help.

It’s called Results About You, and it makes it easy to request the removal of search results that contain your phone number, home address or email.

“We’re giving you even more control over your online presence. Let’s say you come across a result that contains your personal contact information that you don’t want public. With this tool, right from the Google app, you can easily request the removal of search results that contain your phone number, home address or email address, said Prabhakar Raghavan, senior vice president of Search at Google at the company’s recent Search On 22 livestream.

Keep in mind, it’s not a complete solution.

“Even though removing these results doesn’t scrub your contact information from the web overall, we’re doing everything to safeguard your information on Google search,” said Raghavan.

To use it, search for yourself on Google and locate a result containing personal information.

Next, hit the three dots next to the result. Then look for the button labeled “Remove result” and tap it.

Step 1: Tap the three dots next to a search result. (KTLA)
Step 2: Tap the button labeled Remove result. (KTLA)

Google will ask you some questions about why you’d like the result removed. Once you answer them, you’ll have to wait a few days for a response from Google about whether they can remove the result.

You can also watch this Reel on Instagram that explains the step-by-step process.

“It’s an exceptional first step by Google,” said Kaplan, who helps people reclaim their privacy online. “It’s critical that you care. That information can be used against you in so many different situations.”

Hayley Kaplan, online privacy expert. (KTLA)

Kaplan said personal information on the web can be used for identity theft and ageism, then there’s the personal safety aspect and protecting yourself against people with malicious intent.

She said Google’s tool is helpful, but it’s just a start.

“It’s always best to remove it from the source if you can,” said Kaplan, who provides takedown information on her website.

A service called Delete Me has DIY opt-out guides for popular sites including Spokeo, Whitepages and MyLife.

Discover has a free feature for customers in their mobile app called Online Privacy Protection. They’ll scan for your personal info and submit opt-out requests on your behalf every three months.

“I do think you want to be very careful every time you supply out personal information. You need to understand that there’s a consequence,” concluded Kaplan.

Keep in mind that Google’s tool is still rolling out, so not everyone will have access to it right away. Next year, Google will let you sign up for alerts that tell you when new results containing your personal info hit the web.

Mon, 31 Oct 2022 07:07:00 -0500 en-US text/html
Killexams : Sight Tech Global 2022 agenda announced

The third annual Sight Tech Global conference, a virtual, free and highly accessible event on December 7 and 8 convenes some of the world’s top experts working on assistive tech, especially AI, for people who are blind or visually impaired. If you don’t follow this topic, maybe you should, because a lot of cutting-edge tech over the years — think OCR and NLP — was developed at the outset with blind people in mind, and went from there to more mainstream uses. Register today!

At this year’s event we have sessions with the creators of several new devices to assist with vision, and we’ll talk about the technology architecture decisions that went into balancing capability with cost and tapping existing platforms.

We’ll also take our first look at accessibility in VR, which is an area of huge concern because if/when VR takes off in the entertainment and business worlds, it’s vital that people without vision have access, as they do today on smart phones and computers thanks to screenreaders like JAWS, VoiceOver and NVDA.

Our third big slab of programming is about AI itself. There is no shortage of hype as far as AI’s capabilities, and it’s important to push back on that by discussing some serious limitations and deficits in the way today’s AI works for people with disabilities, not to mention humanity in general. At the same time, AI is arguably the best core tech ever for people without sight. Understanding AI is vital to the future of everyone with disabilities for all those reasons. Don’t forget to register today!

And before you browse this awesome agenda: For technologists, designers and product folks working on earthshaking assistive tech, we’re hosting a small, in-person event on December 9 featuring workshops on assistive tech, many run by the same luminaries on the agenda. Interested? Contact us.

Here’s the agenda. To see times and more, go to the Sight Tech Global agenda page.

The Dynamic Tactile Device: That “Holy Braille” for educations is near 

Following up on last year’s discussion of the APH and Humanware collaboration to create an education-focused tactile display (see next session), Greg Stilson updates Sight Tech Global on the project’s progress and APH’s work toward an SDK for developers to build on the tactile display. Greg Stilson will also lead a breakout session for attendees who want to go deeper on the Dynamic Tactile Device.

Greg Stilson, Head of Global Innovation, APH

Moderator: Devin Coldewey, Writer & Photographer, TechCrunch

The DOT Pad: How the Bible and smartphone speaker tech inspired a breakthrough 

For decades, engineers have worked toward a braille display that can render tactile images and multiline braille. DOT Pad may have cracked the code with an innovative approach to generating dynamic fields of braille pins actuated by smart integrations combined with existing technologies, like Apple’s VoiceOver. Eric Kim and Ki Sung will also lead a breakout session for attendees who want to learn more.

Eric Ju Yoon Kim Co-Founder/CEO DOT

Ki Kwang Sung Co-Founder/CEO DOT

Moderator: Devin Coldewey Writer & Photographer TechCrunch

Virtual Reality and Inclusion: What does non-visual access to the metaverse mean?

People with disabilities and accessibility advocates are working to make sure the metaverse is accessible to everyone. This panel will delve into research on the challenges current virtual and augmented reality tools create for people who are blind or have low vision.The panelists will share their experiences using immersive technologies and explore how these tools can be used to enhance employment opportunities in hybrid and remote workplaces — but only if they are built with inclusion in mind.

Moderator Bill Curtis Davidson Co-Director, Partnership on Employment & Accessible Technology (PEAT)

Alexa Huth, Director Strategic Communications, PEAT

Brandon Keith Biggs, Software Engineer, The Smith-Kettlewell Eye Research Institute and CEO XR Navigation

Aaron Gluck, PhD candidate in Human-Centered Computing, Clemson University

Inventing the “screenreader” for VR: Owlchemy Lab’s Cosmonious High 

For developers of virtual reality games, there’s every reason to experiment with accessibility from the start, which is what the Owlchemy Labs team did with Cosmonious High, the 2022 release of a fun, first-person game situated in an inter-galactic high school that one reviewer said “has all the charm and cheek of a good Nickelodeon kids show.” And it reveals some of the earliest approaches to accessibility in VR.

Peter Galbraith, Accessibility Engineer II, Owlchemy Labs

Jazmin Cano, Accessibility Product Manager II, Owlchemy Labs

Moderator James Rath, Filmmaker, Accessibility Advocate and Gamer

Audio Description the Pixar Way

AI-driven, synthetic audio description may have a place in some forms of accessible video content, but the artistry of the entirely human-produced audio descriptions Pixar produces for its productions set a creative standard no AI will ever attain, and that’s all for the good. Meet members of the Pixar team behind excellence in audio descriptions.

Eric Pearson, Home Entertainment Supervisor, Pixar

Anna Capezzera, Director, Audio Description Operations, Deluxe

Laura Post, Voice Actress

Christina Stevens, Writing Manager, Deluxe

Moderator Tom Wlodkowski, Vice President, Accessibility, Comcast

Seeing AI and the New AI

Microsoft’s hugely popular Seeing AI is one of the apps that appears to do it all, from reading documents to recognizing people and things. Those services are enabled by Microsoft’s rapidly advancing cloud-based AI systems. How is Seeing AI advancing with those capabilities and what is the future for Seeing AI?

Saqib Shaikh, Co-founder of Seeing AI, Microsoft

Moderator Larry Goldberg, Accessibility Sensei & Technology Consultant

Accessibility Is AI’s Biggest Challenge: How Alexa aims to make it fairer for everyone

Smart home technology, like Alexa, has been one of the biggest boons in recent years for people who are blind, and for people with disabilities altogether. Voice technology and AI help empower people in many ways, but one obstacle stands in its way: making it equitable. In this session, learn from Amazon about how they’re approaching the challenge ahead.

Peter Korn, Director of Accessibility, Devices & Services, Amazon

Josh Miele, Principal Accessibility Researcher, Amazon

Caroline Desrosiers, Founder & CEO, Scribely

Hands on with Seleste

Rapid advances in phones, data networks and hardware miniaturization always seem to be converging on the concept of that super useful, affordable, unobtrusive assistive device. Seleste plans to launch later this year with a pair of tech-enabled glasses that mark an important waypoint on that journey.

Shubh Mittal, Founder, Seleste

Smit Patel, Co-Founder, Seleste

Moderator, Jennison Asuncion, Head of Accessibility Engineering Evangelism, LinkedIn

Hands on with ARx

Like Seleste, ARx is a recently released device designed to take advantage of the technology tech platforms that surround everyday life with a private, minimally visible, head-mounted device. Both the Seleste and ARx leaders will discuss what they’ve learned in the course of developing and testing their devices.

Charles Leclerq, CEO, ARx Vision

Moderator, Lucy Greco, Electronic accessibility expert and consultant

What’s Next with StellarTrek

Where Seleste and ARx are newcomers to assistive devices, Humanware is a highly respected, established player whose new StellarTrek also takes powerful advantage of technology advances but also parts ways with the newcomers when it comes to technology architecture and form factors.

Louis-Philippe Massé, Vice President of Product Innovation and Technologies, Humanware

Peter Tucic, Director of Strategic Partnerships, Humanware

Moderator, Sam Proulx, Accessibility Evangelist, Fable

The Problems with AI 

Despite the stunning advances in AI over the past decade, the so-called “deep learning” AI technology prevalent today has under-appreciated limitations and even poses societal dangers. Our speakers are world-renowned AI experts and AI “dissenters” who believe we need an AI that’s both more accountable and better able to produce common sense results.

David Ferrucci, Founder & CEO, Elemental Cognition

Gary Marcus, Founder and Executive Chairman, Robust AI

Moderator, Ned Desmond, Founder and Executive Producer, Sight Tech Global

Did Computer Vision AI Just Get Worse or Better?

The ability of assistive tech devices to recognize objects, faces and scenes is a type of AI called Computer Vision, which calls for building vast databases on images labeled by humans to train AI algorithms. A new technique called “one-shot learning” learns dramatically faster because the AI trains itself on images across the internet. No human supervision needed. Is that a good idea?

Danna Gurari, Asst. Professor, Founding Director, Image & Video Computing group, University of Colorado Boulder

Moderator, Cecily Morrison, Principal Researcher, Microsoft Research Cambridge

What Waymo Learned at the DOT Inclusive Design Challenge 

Waymo participated in the U.S. Department of Transportation Inclusive Design Challenge, and emerged with numerous accessibility lessons and features that will help Waymo’s autonomous rides offer people with disabilities better service. Waymo’s team is still processing all they learned.

Lauren Schwendimann, UX Design Lead & Manager, Waymo

Jeffrey Colon, Director of Access Technology, Lighthouse for the Blind and Visually Impaired

Moderator, Mike May, Chief Evangelist, Goodmaps

Don’t forget to register for this free, virtual event.

We’re grateful to current sponsors iSenpai, Google, Amazon, LinkedIn, Humanware, Microsoft, Ford, Fable, APH and Waymo. If you would like to sponsor the event, please contact us. All sponsorship revenues go to the nonprofit Vista Center for the Blind and Visually Impaired, which has been serving the Silicon Valley community for 75 years.

Fri, 11 Nov 2022 05:04:00 -0600 en-US text/html
Killexams : Sight and sound: Smart specs can rewind conversations in front of your eyes

Sight and sound: Smart specs can rewind conversations in front of your eyes

  • Xrai Glass can rewind what was just said in real-life conversation
  • They are designed for the hard-of-hearing and users get recap with 'Hey Xrai'
  • The experience is compared to 205in IMAX screen is 'Alexa... but for your eyes'
  • First deaf Love Island contestant Tasha Ghouri cried tears of joy when she tried it

It is easily done – not quite catching what was just said in a conversation.

Now a new pair of glasses can come to the rescue by rewinding the chat in text in front of your eyes.

The software behind the smart spectacles, designed by British technology firm Xrai Glass, is designed for people who are hard of hearing, but they can help others too. 

Wearers say 'Hey, Xrai' for a recap of what was just said with the glasses showing a text summary. The specs can also translate other languages into English.

Comparing the glasses to Amazon's voice-activated personal assistant, Xrai said they were like 'Alexa... but for your eyes'.

It predicted they may one day be available as contact lenses.

Pioneering: Tasha Ghouri, 23, modelling the Xrai Glass eyewear

Former Love Island star Tasha Ghouri (pictured at the ITV Palooza yesterday), 23, who was the first deaf contestant and is an ambassador for Xrai, said she cried tears of joy when she tried the technology

The glasses, which weigh under three ounces and have darkened lenses, are connected to the user's smartphone and project images by using tiny Sony TVs.

The experience is said to be the equivalent of watching a 205-inch IMAX cinema screen.

Xrai said wearers will be able to see the person in front of them and subtitles of what they are saying in real-time.

Different people in a group conversation will come up under different colours so the wearer can tell who is talking. 

The software is now available through the Xrai app on Google Playstore. The basic version of the app costs nothing, but there are premium versions that cost up to £49.99 a month.

It is currently only available to use on glasses made by Chines-firm Nreal, which cost £400. But the company hopes it will be able to run on other smart glasses in the future.

Xrai said wearers will be able to see the person in front of them and subtitles of what they are saying in real-time

Xrai said the device will also allow users to ask questions, such as what the weather is like, with the answers instantly appearing as subtitles.

The glasses can help out holidaymakers struggling to communicate abroad by translating nine languages, including Mandarin and Spanish.

Former Love Island star Tasha Ghouri, 23, who was the first deaf contestant and is an ambassador for Xrai, said she cried tears of joy when she tried the technology.

She added: 'This is really going to change people's lives.'

Wed, 16 Nov 2022 10:04:00 -0600 text/html
Killexams : Deputies search for information on 2012 murder

CHARLESTON COUNTY, S.C. (WCSC) - The Charleston County Sheriff’s Office is looking for information on a decade-old murder.

Deputies say 49-year-old Nathaniel Gordon was playing cards on Nov. 9, 2012, at a home on Old Jacksonboro Road in Adams Run when someone knocked on the door.

Deputies say one of the other card players opened the door and immediately shut it when they saw someone on the other side with a gun.

At some point, a shotgun went off and Gordon was killed.

Deputies say it’s not clear if the gun was fired by someone inside the home or the person outside the door.

Anyone with information is asked to contact Det. Barry Goldstein at 843-554-2241 or Crimestoppers of the Lowcountry at 843-554-1111.

Wed, 09 Nov 2022 04:17:00 -0600 en text/html
Killexams : Computer and Information Sciences degrees are the most loved among recent grads

The big picture: Selecting a career path is arguably the biggest decision a young person will face up to that point in their life, and most don't get it right out of the gate. Among those that choose college, roughly four out of five end up changing their major at least once according to the National Center for Education Statistics. Even students that stick with it and cross the finish line can regret their choice in hindsight.

According to a recent ZipRecruiter survey of more than 1,500 college graduates looking for a job, nearly half – 44 percent – said they regret their college major choice.

Journalism was the most regretted college major. Sociology and liberal arts / general studies tied for second place followed by degrees in communications and education. Political science, biology and English language / literature also made the top 10 list.

Not everyone hated their major selection. Among those surveyed, the happiest graduates were those with degrees in computer and information sciences, criminology, engineering and nursing. Most with degrees in business administration / management, finance, psychology and human resources said they'd choose the same major if they had it to do over again.

It should come as little surprise that there's a correlation between feelings about degrees and current job prospects as well as pay. Computer science graduates, for example, are in high demand across multiple industries with an annual average salary north of $100,000.

ZipRecruiter found that among communications graduates, those who are happy with their field are earning 1.6 times more than those who would select a different degree. Similarly, satisfied grads with marketing management / research degrees are earning three times more than those with regrets.

Of course, college isn't for everyone. Plenty of people head right into the workforce straight out of high school, and many become very successful. Taking this route eliminates the possibility of being saddled with student loan debt and affords a head start on peers that are still studying.

Image credit: Ekrulila

Mon, 14 Nov 2022 09:52:00 -0600 Shawn Knight en-US text/html
Killexams : Truce in sight on same-sex-marriage and dissent

America could finally be on its way to hammering out a truce between same-sex-marriage advocates and religious opponents. It’s a tall order.

Congress is the architect of one part of the truce. The Senate is advancing a bill, with bipartisan support, to ensure a same-sex couple’s marital status and benefits will be secure in all 50 states. The goal is to get it signed into law before Congress adjourns this year.

The US Supreme Court, meanwhile, will hear a case Dec. 8 about Colorado website designer Lorie Smith, who wants to customize sites celebrating weddings but not same-sex weddings. 

Colorado law requires businesses to serve all customers, regardless of race, ethnicity or sexual orientation. Smith is fine with that. She says she has never turned away gay or lesbian customers. But she draws the line at creating websites for same-sex marriage. Smith wants to post a sign saying she will design sites only for marriages between one man and one woman, consistent with the Bible’s teachings.

The Colorado Civil Rights Commission says, “No”: The sign would be hurtful to the gay community. If Smith wants to make wedding sites, she must make same-sex wedding websites too. That’s like ordering a store that makes Christmas ornaments to make Hanukkah ornaments too. Or a Muslim catering hall to serve pork chops.

Smith is suing for the right to post her sign. When she lost in the lower courts, dissenting Judge Timothy Tymkovich reflected, “We have moved from ‘live and let live’ to ‘you can’t say that.’”

Smith's case has similarities to 2018's Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, where the court ruled in favor of baker Jack Phillips.
Smith’s case has similarities to 2018’s Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, where the court ruled in favor of baker Jack Phillips.
REUTERS/Rick Wilking/File Photo

Sound familiar? In 2018, the Supreme Court ruled on a similar case, Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. Owner Jack Phillips said his religion prevented him from designing cakes that celebrate same-sex marriages. The court ruled 7 to 2 for Phillips, arguing that Colorado had taken a mocking, dismissive attitude toward his religion.

Even so, the Masterpiece ruling was no masterpiece of legal reasoning, which is why the court is now considering Smith’s battle.

Colorado authorities’ attitude toward the religious is still “Let them eat cake.” Their approach smacks of intolerance.

Smith’s attorneys object to the coercion and “harassing litigation” that LGBTQ advocates are using to target religious believers not just in Colorado but all across the country: A pro-life photographer is sued for refusing to make promotional photos for Planned Parenthood; a family farm is ousted from a farmers’ market for posting Catholic beliefs about marriage on Facebook.

LGBTQ advocates have been strong-arming devout business owners and bringing a torrent of lawsuits against them. Smith’s lawyers are urging the court to end this “toxic legal environment.”

Some lawsuits look like setups, suggests The Wall Street Journal’s William McGurn. The same day Phillips won his victory in the Supreme Court, a transgender woman ordered a custom cake from his store, to celebrate transitioning from male to female. When Phillips refused, she sued him. What are the chances she went to Masterpiece Cakeshop randomly?

“What she really wants,” wrote McGurn, “is not a cake.” She wants to force Phillips to endorse ideas he doesn’t believe or force him out of business if he won’t.

Smith's lawyers are asking the Supreme Court to end the “toxic legal environment" where LGBTQ activists bring lawsuits against business owners.
Smith’s lawyers are asking the Supreme Court to end the “toxic legal environment” where LGBTQ activists bring lawsuits against business owners.
AP Photo/David Zalubowski

Weighing in on Smith’s case, the American Civil Liberties Union asks if architecture, photography and other creative businesses can post signs saying, “We Do Not Serve Blacks, Gays, or Muslims.” It’s obvious signs like that would be abhorrent and unconstitutional. Smith’s sign does not exclude any group, only a type of product that is inconsistent with her faith.

Smith’s lawyers are imploring the court to “harmonize” the rights in conflict here — Americans’ longstanding right to free speech and the LGBTQ community’s right to equal treatment. Harmonize is the right approach.

In our pluralistic society, neither side can win entirely, leaving the other side with no rights and no voice.

Judge Tymkovich said our only choice is to take a “live and let live” approach. Expect a majority of the justices to agree.

Betsy McCaughey is a former lieutenant governor of New York.

Twitter: @Betsy_McCaughey

Tue, 22 Nov 2022 18:51:00 -0600 en-US text/html
Killexams : How to tell if your colleagues keep information to themselves that could help you do your job better – and how to stop them
  • "Quiet constraining" is the latest business catchphrase, following "quiet quitting."
  • It refers to withholding of valuable information from coworkers or managers. 
  • An expert told Insider it could cause real issues and further encourage individualism.

Are you withholding information from your colleagues that could help them do their job better? If you are, you might be guilty of "quiet constraining."

Connor Campbell, a business-finance expert at NerdWallet, said failure to reveal more efficient ways to execute tasks has the potential to hinder growth and cause conflict in the workplace.

The phrase has been coined after Insider led the way on "quiet quitting" with an article in March about "coasting culture," or setting stronger work-life boundaries while still collecting a paycheck. 

Kahoot! recently surveyed 1,635 employees in the United States and found that 58% of respondents admitted to holding onto information that could benefit their coworkers. 

Just over three quarters of Gen Z workers, which Pew Research defines as those born after 1997, are the most likely to be guilty of "quiet constraining," the survey found.

Moreover, 95% of the respondents said they feel bored at work, compared to 87% of workers overall, primarily due to online employee training and virtual team meetings. 

Introduce employees to new recruits

Campbell said there are ways businesses can help crack down on "quiet constraining."

He said it's important to introduce new employees to their colleagues. They should be told about new recruits and "given a run-down of their strengths and what they'll be bringing to the team. This makes the new member of staff less of a rival, and more of a team member," Campbell added.

He also suggested setting up one-on-one meetings or calls to help employees to get to know their colleagues better. 

Share knowledge in morning meetings

Starting the day with a group meeting can help set the tone for the rest of the day, along with setting expectations and tasks for the entire team.

"Business owners should remember that if they want to foster an information-sharing culture, this also applies to them," Campbell said.

Allow each staff member to have the opportunity to speak about any information they have gathered that they think would be useful to the team, and be sure to praise employees that share for doing so. 

Set up a noticeboard

Managers can set up physical or online noticeboards to post important information.

Managers can share details posted in meetings, giving a boost to employees who that shared that information, Campbell said.

Team-building activities 

The secret to a successful team-building activity is identifying the reasons for communication breakdowns and selecting appropriate activities to target the problems, Campbell said. 

"Forcing people to exercise against their will, for example, may actually do more harm than good, as employees will then associate the team with this negative experience."

Encourage group working and team projects

"Understated ways that business owners can curb selfish thinking in the workplace is by introducing more group work rather than individual projects," Campbell said.

Group projects can also help to fully utilize all employees' strengths and specialties, leading to more respect among colleagues and generally helping staff feel more valued in the workplace. 

Fri, 02 Dec 2022 21:36:00 -0600 en-US text/html
Killexams : Title Search: Can You Find 15 Spy Novels Hiding in Plain Sight? Title Search: Can You Find 15 Spy Novels Hiding in Plain Sight? - The New York Times
Book Review|Title Search: Can You Find 15 Spy Novels Hiding in Plain Sight?
Fri, 18 Nov 2022 23:00:00 -0600 en text/html
Killexams : Check Out IndieWire’s Critics’ Ballots for the 2022 Sight & Sound Poll of the Best Films of All Time

It’s the list so formative and formidable that it can only be published once a decade. Every ten years, Sight & Sound unnerves and delights cinephiles in equal measure, care of its seminal list of the best films of all time. First conducted in 1952, this year’s iteration of included the largest assortment of voters yet, including over 1,600 film critics and journalists from around the globe. Of those numbers: four of IndieWire’s own, who are eager to share both their picks for the poll and a little insight into how they arrived at those choices.

For the 2022 edition of the poll, Chantal Akerman’s “Jeanne Dielman, 23 Quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles” took the top spot, followed by a range of other picks, including “Vertigo,” “Citizen Kane,” “Tokyo Story,” “In the Mood for Love,” “2001: A Space Odyssey,” “Beau Travail,” “Mulholland Drive,” “Man with the Movie Camera,” and “Singin’ in the Rain.”

All voters were asked to pick not “the best” or “their favorite” films, but something slightly different: “the greatest,” a term they were free to interpret however they saw fit. And interpret we did!

Ahead, IndieWire’s own critics who contributed to the latest poll share their own lists, some insights into their list-making processes, and much more.

All films are listed in alphabetical order on each ballot.

David Ehrlich, Chief Film Critic

The act of making any sort of movie list is an open invitation for second guesses any regrets — one that I suspect cinephiles have always been powerless to resist by virtue of loving a medium young enough to seem like it can still be seen in full — but never, in all my years of compulsively ranking art like a moron, have I experienced anything quite like the sick-to-my-stomach gut-punch I felt when I mailed off my Sight & Sound ballot of the 10 greatest films ever made. I’d obsessed about it for weeks, only to swap out almost half of the list at the last second in some kind of hare-brained attempt to make my ballot seem less calculated than it was.

Doubts poured in the moment I fired it off, as if pressing that little “send” button had punctured a hole in the hull of the Titanic. “What happened to ‘Mishima: A Life in Four Chapters’? or ‘Modern Times’? Hadn’t you promised yourself that you would err on the side of canon-busting personal favorites like Sofia Coppola’s ‘Somewhere’ and left-field choices that had no hope of cracking the overall list like Koreyoshi Kurahara’s anarchic ‘The Warped Ones’? Oh, and where the fuck is ‘Carol’?!”

EYES WIDE SHUT, Leon Vitali (sitting), Tom Cruise (lower center), 1999. © Warner Bros. /Courtesy Everett Collection

“Eyes Wide Shut”

Everett Collection / Everett Collection

But 10 is a cruel and unforgiving number, and meaningless choices had to be made. “Close-Up,” “Ikiru,” “Eyes Wide Shut,” “Yi Yi,” “Sans Soleil,” and “Jeanne Dielman” were non-negotiable bulls-eyes that fell dead in the center of the Venn diagram between formative viewings, medium-shaping masterpieces, and sentimental picks. Much like those movies,“F for Fake” radically expanded my understanding of what movies could do; I don’t know if it’s better than “Citizen Kane,” but it left a deeper impression on me. “The Wind Rises” was an easy choice: I didn’t want live-action to dominate the entire list, so I made room for the greatest animated film ever made. “Titanic” is on there because I’ve watched it more than any other movie over the course of my life, continue to be awed by it every time, and sincerely believe that it deserves to be canonized alongside cinema’s greatest epics, while “The Music Room” has resonated with me since I first saw it, and just happened to be on my mind that morning.

I still worry that my list is too safe and stuffy — even while I kick myself over the absence of anything made before 1952 — but such is the nature of these things. The good news is that 2032 will be here before you know it, and maybe I’ll be more comfortable with a ballot implying that “Forgetting Sarah Marshall” is better than the collected works of Ingmar Bergman, Alfred Hitchcock, John Ford, et. al by then.

“Close-Up” (Abbas Kiarostami)
“Eyes Wide Shut” (Stanley Kubrick)
“F for Fake” (Orson Welles)
“Ikiru” (Akira Kurosawa)
“Jeanne Dielman, 23, quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles” (Chantal Akerman)
“The Music Room” (Satyajit Ray)
“Sans Soleil” (Chris Marker)
“Titanic” (James Cameron)
“The Wind Rises” (Hayao Miyazaki)
“Yi Yi” (Edward Yang)

Kate Erbland, Executive Editor, Film

While David seems to have spent the past few months — fun fact: ballots were due in early August — agonizing over his (quite good!) choices, I approached my ballot in a slightly different way. Which is to say, I meticulously picked my own brain, combed over previous entries on the list, considered what I thought needed more representation (like more women), scribbled, combined, sorted, de-sorted, added in, tossed out, and then promptly ended it all with Cameron Crowe’s “Almost Famous” and hit “send” on that baby. And while I looked forward to the day the poll was shared, I didn’t worry about it at all.

To the point that — full transparency here — I didn’t even remember the full contents of my ballot until each individual list was published in full by Sight & Sound on Friday. It’s not that I think these lists are somehow forgettable, but they are ephemeral. Consider how much of this list — this seminal, lauded, meticulous, curated, wonderful list — changes each decade it’s published. All of this is changeable, all of it is transitory, and that’s a great thing.

ALMOST FAMOUS, John Fedevich, Kate Hudson, Billy Crudup, Jason Lee, 2000, (c)DreamWorks/courtesy Everett Collection

“Almost Famous”

©DreamWorks/courtesy of The Everett Collection

The films I picked back in August (well, let’s be honest, I submitted mine in July, I just love getting things done) reflect how I felt back in July. In the moment, those were the “greatest” films to me, the ones I was eager to champ and tout, to share with anyone and everyone. Would that list look different if I made it today? Probably, but that doesn’t make this one less valuable (it just means that my stress level is perhaps a touch lower than David’s).

To paraphrase a film on my ballot: “What do you love about movies?” To begin with…

“Almost Famous” (Cameron Crowe)
“Citizen Kane” (Orson Welles)
“Cleo from 5 to 7” (Agnes Varda)
“The Godfather” (Francis Ford Coppola)
“It Happened One Night” (Frank Capra)
“Jaws” (Steven Spielberg)
“Jeanne Dielman, 23, quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles” (Chantal Akerman)
“North by Northwest” (Alfred Hitchcock)
“The Piano” (Jane Campion)
“Singin’ in the Rain” (Gene Kelly and Stanley Donen)

Eric Kohn, Executive Editor and VP, Editorial Strategy

I appreciate the care and anxiety over creating these lists that my colleagues express here, but I have to say I shrugged off that kind of prevarication a long time ago. The challenge of anointing any film the best of all time is that you’re always limited by your own criteria. No single list can epitomize the full scope of film history or the personal relationships that often inform individual choices. Year-end lists have the practical function of immediate advocacy — they provide handy reminders of movies worth seeing in the moment — but “best of all time” lists tend to have the opposite effect: No matter what, you’re excluding a lot of cinema worth singling out.

The only way out of this conundrum is to make peace with the subjectivity of the process, and so I tend to think of it in immediate, autobiographical terms. Which films still stick with me after all these years — and which ones have infiltrated my recency bias?

2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY, Keir Dullea, 1968

“2001: A Space Odyssey”

Everett Collection / Everett Collection

Many of the movies I treasure the most are the ones that led me to appreciate the expansive nature of Thea art form. “F for Fake” remains the movie that had a transformative effect on me after all these years, much in the same way it did for David, as it consolidated so much that I love about the movies as both a way to see the world and escape from it. “2001” was my gateway drug to the avant garde. “City Lights” epitomizes the poignant undercurrent of silent slapstick. My most “obscure” choice is Jean Rouch’s extraordinary 1970 colonialist indictment “Little By Little,” which has to be seen to be believed (think “Borat” with an anthropologist twist). And I have never seen a richer film about WWII — and the horrible instincts that such a climate allowed to run wild — than “Seven Beauties.” It is even more relevant today.

Other films on my list were simply on my mind when this poll came along: A recent viewing of “The Big Lebowski” made realize that its enduring cultural appeal is, in fact, because it’s a note-perfect encapsulation of American malaise. I recently introduced “My Neighbor Totoro” to a young relative and recognized how profound and mythic its narrative, like some kind of ancient parable waiting eons to be told, that just happened to find its expression in the animated medium. “Playtime,” which I sat and watched in one of MOMA’s permanent exhibition galleries this year, is like that, too: It’s the post-modern equivalent of a cave painting, a complete visual statement on the world as a singular, functioning system. And it kills me that — again, having recently revisited it — more people don’t recognize “After Hours” as the Best Scorsese Movie, because it’s also the most New York thing of all the very New York things he’s made.

Anyway: I’m thrilled to see “Jeanne Dielman” capping this survey because it seems very likely to encourage more people to take daring experimental storytelling seriously — aka, the kind of filmmaking that reminds us it’s a damn art form before all else. I need to see it again before I vote in another one of these. Who knows what my recency bias will bring the next time out?

“2001: A Space Odyssey” (Stanley Kubrick)
“After Hours” (Martin Scorsese)
“All That Jazz” (Bob Fosse)
“The Big Lebowski” (Joel and Ethan Coen)
“City Lights” (Charlie Chaplin)
“F for Fake” (Orson Welles)
“Little by Little” (Jean Rouch)
“My Neighbor Totoro” (Hayao Miyazaki)
“Playtime” (Jacques Tati)
“Seven Beauties” (Lina Wertmuller)

Anne Thompson, Editor at Large

While plenty of people are decrying the end of the cinephile authority of the Sight & Sound poll, the pendulum had to swing toward more diverse directors, even if it will likely swing back again. “Jeanne Dielman” is a film I respect more than I admire, but I get why it rose to number one status with a voting pool that more than doubled since 2012.

Several of my choices made the top 100: “The General,” “Once Upon a Time in the West,” “Breathless,” and Jane Campion’s 1993 “The Piano,” the most recent film on my list. I picked “Ran” over “Rashomon” and “Seven Samurai” and “Notorious” over “North by Northwest,” “Vertigo,” and “Psycho.”

“Touch of Evil” fell off the Top 100, but at least “Citizen Kane” is still there. There’s no Howard Hawks to be found. The chameleon director gets punished for having so many great films, all different genres: slapstick comedy “Bringing Up Baby” was my choice. For my musical, I picked Vincente Minnelli’s family heart-tugger “Meet Me in St. Louis.” And my romance was the exquisite Scottish fable “I Know Where I’m Going,” from Michael Powell.

TOUCH OF EVIL, Orson Welles, Marlene Dietrich, 1958

“Touch of Evil”

Courtesy Everett Collection

“Breathless” (Jean-Luc Godard)
“Bringing Up Baby” (Howard Hawks)
“The General” (Buster Keaton)
“I Know Where I’m Going” (Michael Powell)
“Meet Me in St. Louis” (Vincente Minnelli)
“Notorious” (Alfred Hitchcock)
“Once Upon a Time in the West” (Sergio Leone)
“The Piano” (Jane Campion)
“Ran” (Akira Kurosawa)
“Touch of Evil” (Orson Welles)

You can check out the full results for the Sight & Sound poll right here.

Sign Up: Stay on top of the latest breaking film and TV news! Sign up for our Email Newsletters here.

Fri, 02 Dec 2022 22:00:00 -0600 en text/html
2B0-202 exam dump and training guide direct download
Training Exams List