Your current location: 99jili >>is jili777 legit or not >>main body

jilibet casino login

https://livingheritagejourneys.eu/cpresources/twentytwentyfive/ jilibet gaming login 2025-02-05

jilibet casino login

jilibet casino login Salim Khan turns 89: Salman Khan's rumoured girlfriend Iulia Vantur shares a heartfelt birthday wish - 'You made me feel like home in India'VANCOUVER - A Federal Court judge has dismissed an appeal by a “deeply religious” British Columbia health executive who said he was wrongfully denied employment insurance after being fired three years ago for refusing to get the COVID-19 vaccine. Darold Sturgeon was fired as executive director of medical affairs for Interior Health in November 2021 after refusing to get the vaccine based on his Christian beliefs. He applied for employment insurance benefits but was denied due to being fired for “misconduct,” with appeals to two levels of the Social Security Tribunal also failing, leading him to seek a judicial review in Federal Court in August 2023. The ruling says Sturgeon believed the tribunal should have examined his assertion under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms that the term “misconduct” did not apply to his case “because he was exercising his freedom of religion.” Justice William Pentney says “recent, abundant and unanimous case law” defined a specific and narrow role for the tribunal’s appeal divisions, focusing on an employee’s conduct, and not justification for and employer’s policies or compliance with the Charter. The ruling says Sturgeon’s appeal fell “outside the mandate” of the tribunal and he could have challenged Interior Health’s mandatory vaccine police “through other avenues.” It said these included advancing a Charter claim, lodging a wrongful dismissal suit or labour grievance, or complaining to the British Columbia Human Rights Commission. The office of the British Columbia Human Rights Commissioner separately clarified that such a complaint would have to be lodged with the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal. “The point is, there were other avenues available to pursue the Charter question; this decision does not cut off the only avenue of relief,” the court’s ruling says. It added of Sturgeon, who represented himself, that “no one has doubted that he acted based on his understanding of his religious obligations,” and that he had “ably advanced his arguments.” “However, despite his sincere and thoughtful arguments, the binding jurisprudence requires that I find against him,” the ruling says. This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 26, 2024.OTTAWA - A Liberal MP says his committee colleagues are wasting time by launching a third inquiry into the former employment minister instead of focusing on important legislation for Indigenous Peoples. Jaime Battiste, who is Mi’kmaq, said there has been an “attack” on fellow Liberal MP Randy Boissonnault, who left his position as employment minister on Wednesday after allegations of shifting claims of Indigenous identity and questions around his past business dealings. Boissonnault has been the subject of two parliamentary probes, and Battiste said a third one by the Indigenous and northern affairs committee is “a waste of time, and it seems to be the Conservatives’ way of ensuring that nothing gets done in the House of Commons.” The Conservatives, NDP and Bloc Québécois all supported pushing ahead with the third study, even after Boissonnault left cabinet. Though Liberal MPs did not object to the motion Thursday, Battiste said the committee’s time would be better spent studying legislation on important issues such as First Nations policing, a modern treaty commissioner and clean water for First Nations. “It’s very much my fear and frustration that politics is now becoming more important at the Indigenous and northern affairs committee than actually Indigenous Peoples that we’re there every day to try to make life better for,” he said. Boissonnault came under intense scrutiny after the National Post reported that a company he previously co-owned described itself as wholly Indigenous-owned in order to apply for government contracts set aside for Indigenous businesses. He has been described as Indigenous multiple times in communications from the Liberal party, and in 2018 referred to himself as “non-status adopted Cree” — a statement he has repeated on other occasions. He also said his great-grandmother was a “full-blooded Cree woman.” He has since clarified that his adoptive mother and brother are Métis, and he apologized for his shifting claims last Friday. The House ethics committee has separately investigated Boissonnault’s past business dealings after media reports alleged he remained involved in the company he co-founded after he was re-elected in 2021. Opposition MPs on the Indigenous and northern affairs committee passed a motion on Tuesday — a day before Boissonnault left cabinet — for the employment minister to appear as a witness to discuss his claims to Indigenous identity. But because Boissonnault is no longer in cabinet, the Liberal chair of the committee ruled Thursday that newly minted Employment Minister Ginette Petitpas Taylor is technically the person the motion called to testify. “I figured this might happen,” said Conservative MP and committee member Jamie Schmale. “If there are games to be played here and we have Minister Petitpas Taylor attend, I don’t think that goes to the spirit of the House order. I don’t think it would be very responsible to go against that ... It’s Randy Boissonault that the House determined it needs and is ordered to appear along with several other witnesses. That’s who we expect to be in that seat.” A new motion from the Conservatives calls directly for Boissonnault to appear at the committee. One of the key concerns raised about Boissonnault in recent weeks is related to the government’s Indigenous business procurement strategy. A directory provides the federal government with names of businesses it could consider using to meet its Indigenous procurement target, which states a minimum five per cent of the total value of government contracts should be held by Indigenous-owned businesses. Indigenous Services Minister Patty Hajdu told a House of Commons committee on Tuesday that the company Boissonnault founded was not listed on that directory. Battiste suggested the committee will now be in a position of determining who is eligible for Indigenous programming and determining who is Indigenous, and as a First Nations person he does not agree with that. “I have a lot of concern because no First Nations, Métis or Inuit in this country are asking committees — who are filled with non-Indigenous Peoples — to determine our identity, who we are.” Schmale, NDP MP Lori Idlout and Bloc MP Sebastian Lemire, who are all members of the committee, did not immediately respond to requests for comment. This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 21, 2024.

By MICHELLE L. PRICE WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. (AP) — An online spat between factions of Donald Trump’s supporters over immigration and the tech industry has thrown internal divisions in his political movement into public display, previewing the fissures and contradictory views his coalition could bring to the White House. The rift laid bare the tensions between the newest flank of Trump’s movement — wealthy members of the tech world including billionaire Elon Musk and fellow entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy and their call for more highly skilled workers in their industry — and people in Trump’s Make America Great Again base who championed his hardline immigration policies. The debate touched off this week when Laura Loomer , a right-wing provocateur with a history of racist and conspiratorial comments, criticized Trump’s selection of Sriram Krishnan as an adviser on artificial intelligence policy in his coming administration. Krishnan favors the ability to bring more skilled immigrants into the U.S. Loomer declared the stance to be “not America First policy” and said the tech executives who have aligned themselves with Trump were doing so to enrich themselves. Much of the debate played out on the social media network X, which Musk owns. Loomer’s comments sparked a back-and-forth with venture capitalist and former PayPal executive David Sacks , whom Trump has tapped to be the “White House A.I. & Crypto Czar.” Musk and Ramaswamy, whom Trump has tasked with finding ways to cut the federal government , weighed in, defending the tech industry’s need to bring in foreign workers. It bloomed into a larger debate with more figures from the hard-right weighing in about the need to hire U.S. workers, whether values in American culture can produce the best engineers, free speech on the internet, the newfound influence tech figures have in Trump’s world and what his political movement stands for. Trump has not yet weighed in on the rift, and his presidential transition team did not respond to a message seeking comment. Musk, the world’s richest man who has grown remarkably close to the president-elect , was a central figure in the debate, not only for his stature in Trump’s movement but his stance on the tech industry’s hiring of foreign workers. Technology companies say H-1B visas for skilled workers, used by software engineers and others in the tech industry, are critical for hard-to-fill positions. But critics have said they undercut U.S. citizens who could take those jobs. Some on the right have called for the program to be eliminated, not expanded. Born in South Africa, Musk was once on an a H-1B visa himself and defended the industry’s need to bring in foreign workers. “There is a permanent shortage of excellent engineering talent,” he said in a post. “It is the fundamental limiting factor in Silicon Valley.” Related Articles National Politics | Trump threat to immigrant health care tempered by economic hopes National Politics | In states that ban abortion, social safety net programs often fail families National Politics | Court rules Georgia lawmakers can subpoena Fani Willis for information related to her Trump case National Politics | New 2025 laws hit hot topics from AI in movies to rapid-fire guns National Politics | Trump has pressed for voting changes. GOP majorities in Congress will try to make that happen Trump’s own positions over the years have reflected the divide in his movement. His tough immigration policies, including his pledge for a mass deportation, were central to his winning presidential campaign. He has focused on immigrants who come into the U.S. illegally but he has also sought curbs on legal immigration , including family-based visas. As a presidential candidate in 2016, Trump called the H-1B visa program “very bad” and “unfair” for U.S. workers. After he became president, Trump in 2017 issued a “Buy American and Hire American” executive order , which directed Cabinet members to suggest changes to ensure H-1B visas were awarded to the highest-paid or most-skilled applicants to protect American workers. Trump’s businesses, however, have hired foreign workers, including waiters and cooks at his Mar-a-Lago club , and his social media company behind his Truth Social app has used the the H-1B program for highly skilled workers. During his 2024 campaign for president, as he made immigration his signature issue, Trump said immigrants in the country illegally are “poisoning the blood of our country” and promised to carry out the largest deportation operation in U.S. history. But in a sharp departure from his usual alarmist message around immigration generally, Trump told a podcast this year that he wants to give automatic green cards to foreign students who graduate from U.S. colleges. “I think you should get automatically, as part of your diploma, a green card to be able to stay in this country,” he told the “All-In” podcast with people from the venture capital and technology world. Those comments came on the cusp of Trump’s budding alliance with tech industry figures, but he did not make the idea a regular part of his campaign message or detail any plans to pursue such changes.

S&P/TSX composite, U.S. markets end the trading day lower FridayThe way Microsoft provided the US government with cybersecurity upgrades is under scrutiny. ProPublica published a report that delves into the “White House Offer”: a deal in which Microsoft sent consultants to install cybersecurity upgrades for free. But those free product upgrades were only covered for up to one year. Did this deal give Microsoft an unfair advantage, and what could it take to shift the federal government’s reliance on the tech giant’s services? The White House Offer ProPublica spoke to eight former Microsoft employees that played a part in the White House Offer. With their insight, the ProPublica’s report details how this deal makes it difficult for users in the federal government to shift away from Microsoft’s products and how it helped to squeeze out competition. While the cybersecurity upgrades were initially free, government agencies need to pay come renewal time. After the installation of the products and employee training, switching to alternatives would be costly. ProPublica also reports that Microsoft salespeople recommended that federal agencies drop products from competitors to save costs. Critics raise concerns that Microsoft’s deal skirted antitrust laws and federal procurement laws. “Why didn't you allow a Deloitte or an Accenture or somebody else to say we want free services to help us do it? Why couldn't they come in and do the same thing? If a company is willing to do something for free like that, why should it be a bias to Microsoft and not someone else that's capable as well?” asks Morey Haber, chief security advisor at BeyondTrust , an identity and access security company. Related: 2024 Cyber Resilience Strategy Report: CISOs Battle Attacks, Disasters, AI ... and Dust ProPublica noted Microsoft’s defense of its deal and the way it worked with the federal government. Microsoft declined to comment when InformationWeek reached out. Josh Bartolomie, vice president of global threat services at email security company Cofense , points out that the scale of the federal government makes Microsoft a logical choice. “The reality of it is ... there are no other viable platforms that offer the extensibility, scalability, manageability other than Microsoft,” he tells InformationWeek. The Argument for Diversification Overreliance on a single security vendor has its pitfalls. “Generally speaking, you don't want to do a sole provider for any type of security services. You want to have checks and balances. You want to have risk mitigations. You want to have fail safes, backup plans,” says Bartolomie. And there are arguments being made that Microsoft created a cybersecurity monoculture within the federal government. Related: Next Steps to Secure Open Banking Beyond Regulatory Compliance Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) raised concerns and called for a multi-vendor approach. “DoD should embrace an alternate approach, expanding its use of open-source software and software from other vendors, that reduces risk-concentration to limit the blast area when our adversaries discover an exploitable security flaw in Microsoft’s, or another company’s software,” they wrote in a letter to John Sherman , former CIO of the Department of Defense. The government has experienced the fallout that follows exploited vulnerabilities. A Microsoft vulnerability played a role in the SolarWinds hack . Earlier this year it was disclosed that Midnight Blizzard, a Russian state-sponsored threat group, executed a password spray attack against Microsoft. Federal agency credentials were stolen in the attack, according to Cybersecurity Dive. “There is proof out there that the monoculture is a problem,” says Haber. Pushback Microsoft’s dominance in the government space has not gone unchallenged over the years. For example, the Department of Defense pulled out of a $10 billion cloud deal with Microsoft . The contract, the Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure (JEDI), faced legal challenges from competitor AWS. Related: Beyond the Election: The Long Cybersecurity Fight vs Bad Actors Competitors could continue to challenge Microsoft’s dominance in the government, but there are still questions about the cost associated with replacing those services. “I think the government has provided pathways for other vendors to approach, but I think it would be difficult ... to displace them,” says Haber. A New Administration Could the incoming Trump administration herald changes in the way the government works with Microsoft and other technology vendors? Each time a new administration steps in, Bartolomie points out that there is a thirst for change. “Do I think that there's a potential that he [Trump] will go to Microsoft and say, ‘Give us better deals. Give us this, give us that’? That's a high possibility because other administrations have,” he says. “The government being one of the largest customers of the Microsoft ecosystem also gives them leverage.” Trump has been vocal about his “America First” policy, but how that could be applied to cybersecurity services used by the government remains to be seen. “Do you allow software being used from a cybersecurity or other perspective to be developed overseas?” asks Haber. Haber points out that outsourced development is typical for cybersecurity companies. “I'm not aware of any cybersecurity company that does exclusive US or even North America ... builds,” he says. Any sort of government mandate requiring cybersecurity services developed solely in the US would raise challenges for Microsoft and the cybersecurity industry as a whole. While the administration’s approach to cybersecurity and IT vendor relationships is not yet known, it is noteworthy that Trump’s view of tech companies could be influential. Amazon pursued legal action over the $10 billion JEDI contract, claiming that Trump’s dislike of company founder Jeff Bezos impacted its ability to secure the deal, The New York Times reports.

BJP-led Centre trying to manipulate electoral rolls to win Delhi poll: AtishiShoals Technologies Group ( NASDAQ:SHLS – Free Report ) had its price target lowered by Guggenheim from $8.00 to $7.00 in a report issued on Thursday, Benzinga reports. Guggenheim currently has a buy rating on the stock. SHLS has been the topic of several other reports. BNP Paribas downgraded shares of Shoals Technologies Group from an “outperform” rating to a “neutral” rating and cut their price objective for the company from $15.00 to $7.00 in a research report on Wednesday, August 7th. Cantor Fitzgerald reissued an “overweight” rating and set a $12.00 price objective on shares of Shoals Technologies Group in a research report on Tuesday, September 17th. Wells Fargo & Company started coverage on shares of Shoals Technologies Group in a research report on Monday, October 14th. They set an “equal weight” rating and a $46.00 price objective on the stock. Citigroup raised shares of Shoals Technologies Group from a “sell” rating to a “neutral” rating and raised their price target for the company from $5.00 to $5.50 in a report on Thursday, October 3rd. Finally, Truist Financial dropped their price target on shares of Shoals Technologies Group from $10.00 to $8.00 and set a “buy” rating on the stock in a report on Friday, September 6th. Three analysts have rated the stock with a sell rating, seven have assigned a hold rating and twelve have issued a buy rating to the company. Based on data from MarketBeat.com, Shoals Technologies Group has a consensus rating of “Hold” and a consensus price target of $11.58. Check Out Our Latest Stock Report on SHLS Shoals Technologies Group Stock Up 9.8 % Shoals Technologies Group ( NASDAQ:SHLS – Get Free Report ) last announced its quarterly earnings data on Tuesday, November 12th. The company reported $0.08 EPS for the quarter, missing the consensus estimate of $0.10 by ($0.02). Shoals Technologies Group had a net margin of 7.78% and a return on equity of 9.83%. The firm had revenue of $102.20 million for the quarter, compared to analysts’ expectations of $98.86 million. During the same period last year, the company posted $0.16 earnings per share. The business’s revenue for the quarter was down 23.8% compared to the same quarter last year. As a group, sell-side analysts anticipate that Shoals Technologies Group will post 0.29 earnings per share for the current fiscal year. Insider Transactions at Shoals Technologies Group In other news, CEO Brandon Moss bought 22,300 shares of the firm’s stock in a transaction on Thursday, November 21st. The shares were bought at an average price of $4.55 per share, for a total transaction of $101,465.00. Following the purchase, the chief executive officer now owns 593,700 shares in the company, valued at approximately $2,701,335. The trade was a 3.90 % increase in their ownership of the stock. The purchase was disclosed in a legal filing with the Securities & Exchange Commission, which is accessible through the SEC website . Company insiders own 1.67% of the company’s stock. Institutional Investors Weigh In On Shoals Technologies Group Institutional investors and hedge funds have recently added to or reduced their stakes in the company. FMR LLC raised its stake in Shoals Technologies Group by 48.9% during the 3rd quarter. FMR LLC now owns 5,806 shares of the company’s stock worth $33,000 after acquiring an additional 1,906 shares during the period. 1620 Investment Advisors Inc. bought a new stake in Shoals Technologies Group during the 2nd quarter worth approximately $54,000. Mackenzie Financial Corp bought a new stake in Shoals Technologies Group during the 2nd quarter worth approximately $64,000. Paloma Partners Management Co bought a new stake in Shoals Technologies Group during the 1st quarter worth approximately $115,000. Finally, TrinityPoint Wealth LLC bought a new stake in Shoals Technologies Group during the 3rd quarter worth approximately $60,000. Shoals Technologies Group Company Profile ( Get Free Report ) Shoals Technologies Group, Inc provides electrical balance of system (EBOS) solutions and components for solar, battery energy, and electric vehicle (EV) charging applications in the United States and internationally. The company designs, manufactures, and sells system solutions for both homerun and combine-as-you-go wiring architectures, as well as offers technical support services. Featured Stories Receive News & Ratings for Shoals Technologies Group Daily - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings for Shoals Technologies Group and related companies with MarketBeat.com's FREE daily email newsletter .

Amenaza de Trump de imponer aranceles podría elevar precios, lo que rompería su promesa de campañaNEW YORK — It’s almost that time of year: Spotify is gearing up to release its annual Wrapped, personalized recaps of users' listening habits and year in audio. Spotify has been giving its listeners breakdowns of their data since 2016. And each year, it’s become a bigger production — and internet sensation. Spotify said its 2023 Wrapped was the “biggest ever created,” in terms of audience reach and the kind of data it provided. So, what will 2024 have in store? Here’s a look at what to know ahead of this year’s Spotify Wrapped. What exactly is Spotify Wrapped? It’s the streaming service's annual overview of individual listening trends, as well as trends around the world. Users learn their top artists, songs, genres, albums and podcasts, all wrapped into one interactive presentation. The campaign has become a social media sensation, as people share and compare their Wrapped data with their friends and followers online. Past iterations have provided users with all kinds of breakdowns and facts, including whether they’re among an artist’s top listeners, as well as a personalized playlist of their top 100 songs of that year to save, share and listen to whenever they’re feeling nostalgic. Spotify also creates a series of playlists that reflect national and global listening trends, featuring the top streamed artists and songs. In 2023, Taylor Swift was Spotify's most streamed artist , unseating Bad Bunny who had held the title for three years in a row. Each year has something new in store. In 2019, Wrapped included a summary of users’ streaming trends for the entire decade. Last year, Spotify matched listeners to a Sound Town based on their artist affinities and how it lined up with those in other parts of the world. When is the expected release date? So far, the streaming platform has kept the highly anticipated release date of Wrapped under ... er, wraps. In past years, it’s been released after Thanksgiving, between Nov. 30 and Dec. 6. Each year, rumors tend to swell on social media around when Spotify stops collecting data in order to prepare their Wrapped results, and this year was no exception. Spotify quickly squashed those presumptions , assuring on social media that “Spotify Wrapped doesn’t stop counting on October 31st.” A representative for Spotify did not respond to a request for comment on when the company stops tracking data for Wrapped. Where can I find my Spotify Wrapped? When Wrapped is released, each user's Spotify account will prompt them to view their interactive data roundup. It can be accessed through the Spotify smartphone app, or by logging on to the Spotify website . Wrapped is available to users with and without Premium subscriptions. What else can I learn with my Spotify data? There are a handful of third-party sites that you can connect your Spotify account to that will analyze your Wrapped data. How Bad is Your Spotify is an AI bot that judges your music taste. Receiptify gives you your top songs on a sharable graphic that looks like, yes, a receipt. Instafest gives you your own personal music festival-style lineup based on your top artists. How NPRCore Are You assesses how similar your music taste is to NPR Music's. What if I don’t have Spotify? Other major streaming platforms such as Apple Music and YouTube Music have developed their own versions of Wrapped in recent years. Apple Music’s Replay not only gives its subscribers a year-end digest of their listening habits but monthly summaries as well — a feature that helps differentiate itself from the one-time Spotify recap. That's released at the end of the calendar year. YouTube Music, meanwhile, has a similar end-of-the-year release for its listeners, as well as periodic seasonal releases throughout the year. It released its annual Recap for users earlier this month.