Can you give examples?

Both clock and auto?

Because other than time, I’m having a hard time seeing what else a clock is telling you by being analogue.

I feel like this is very situation dependent.

That may be the case in your company or industry, but not everywhere.

In my experience there’s been a big difference between a general resume I’m uploading to a place like a LinkedIn or Indeed (and letting the recruiters come to me), using that uploaded resume to apply to job postings on that site, and sending resume/application to specific companies on their site.

For the first one, hell no, no cover letter. How would that even work? No cover letter is better than a generic one.

For applying for specific postings on these sites? For me it depends on just how good the opportunity is. If I feel like there’s some sort of special connection that makes me tailor made for the role, the money is great, it’s doing really interesting work, or a company I really want to work for? Absolutely I’ll include a cover letter. I’m just looking to get out of a shit job, or the role doesn’t really move the needle, but I think it might be a good fit? Nah, just hit that quick apply button and move on.

But if I’m reaching out to a company directly?

Cover letter every time (unless they specifically say not to). If they don’t want it, they won’t read it, but I’ve never felt like it hurt my chances, and in a few interviews, they’ve specifically mentioned something about it.

The artist has perfectly captured the feline character when being scolded here: annoyed, defeated…but utterly incapable of shame or remorse.

PA is only purple on the side that faces the rest of the country.

At state government level, it’s a special breed of the worst aspects of both parties.

While I agree with you in principle, I’m not sure the newspaper example supports your position, although it is an apt analogy.

I would imagine that the counter argument would take the form of something like, “Yes, you don’t have to read the whole paper, but you can’t just buy the comics. You buy the whole paper, get access to the whole thing, and the ads come with it. Similarly, with our web presence, in order to access everything, whether you choose to consume it all or not, the ads must come as a part of it.”

Personally, I don’t fully agree with either that argument or yours, can see the merits and flaws of both, and fall somewhere in the middle.

I’d argue that while they’re within their rights to create, distribute, bundle, and price their content as they see fit, just like the current debate with social media companies, your monitor is your own personal, privately owned platform, and you shouldn’t/can’t be forced to offer a platform to any content you don’t wish to publish (to your audience of one). So you’re perfectly within your rights to want and attempt to only view the content you wish to see, while they’re also perfectly within their rights to want and attempt to package their content in such a way that links their articles with the advertisements of their sponsors.

So at that point, it’s just an arms race between the producer doing their best to force ads onto screens and consumers doing their best to avoid same. Neither side is morally right or wrong, and while there likely is a middle ground that wild be acceptable to both parties, there’s zero good faith between the two sides which would be necessary to establish that middle ground.