Via: https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/24452-eu-might-enforce-goog... which specifically quotes the law that should forbid such approach (Article 6(4) DMA) - so EU initiative and engineers consciously and intentionality breaking EU law in the prototype that is supposed to be replicated later.
Alcohol was always an important cultural symbol (drinking wine as a Christian, for example). This is not the case for tobacco, especially highly artificial one.
Tobacco is inherently bad for one's surrounding as well.
Correct, and since the UK has an Established Church, and does not recognise “freedom of religion” as understood in the USA, banning tobacco entirely is reasonable.
I'm not and have never been in your situation but consider this a summary of all anecdotes I've heard mixed with negotiation techniques.
The thing I would personally do is make sure the client has paid their invoice before providing the service. Essentially, this means paying for all previous missed invoices along with the next one. If you make people pay before giving the service, I think you avoid the case altogether.
Now, if you want to be harder: just ban them. Take them to Collections (or whatever the name is in the USA) and then never provide services to them ever again. This sounds really harsh and unfair but by not paying they also know how far they can go without giving you a dime. "Give them a hand and they take the arm."
upfront billing of professional services (“consulting”) is worse for a few reasons, (1) requires the customer to trust you more (they cannot withhold payment if you screw them or violate the contract) but generally the service provider is the riskier party (2) it causes service gaps (lost billable days) when the customer is late which is almost every month, (3) it requires you to define in advance exactly how many units will be billed and causes a service gap when you hit the retainer limit, (4) it gives the customer a natural ability to throttle billable hours which leads to unpredictable revenue. This all leads to higher bill rates, which is less palatable than a commitment to full time services contract. everyone involved wants predictable spend.
if this is an annual renewal payment for a saas, you need a process to follow which must include 60 and 30 day notices before the invoice, the rest varies greatly based on size - is this $1200/yr (credit card auto charge) or $120k (high touch sales rep)
It surely depends on what the OP is providing. If I was a consultant and the company stopped paying, I would obviously stop working for them on the next day. Otherwise, you could start charging weekly or daily instead of monthly. But then again, if they're not paying...
If I was providing a software or utility, the second you stop paying you are out. This actually happened to me in Japan because my mobile provider stopped sending paper invoices so I forgot to pay. I got cut off without any warning and as soon as I paid I got my access back.
Why does the client have pushing rights to the repository? I would suggest working by pull request and approve all changes that they make. That's what you would do if you were working in a team.
If you work in a bigger structure, surely there is a product manager that can limit the scope of the project.
I would suggest to the client to develop their own tools that are to be supported by them exclusively while you continue supporting the "official" tools.
Thanks for the suggestions. I've considered to protect some branches, but in the end decided against it. I was not looking forward to review all their huge amounts of slop code. It would also be different from reviewing code of a "real" developer. Feedback would normally be a way to help each other and improve as a team, and be received with a certain amount of gratitude or at least understanding. In this case, they would not read the feedback, at best they would feed it to a bot. They would see it as a needless obstacle. I agree to scope my parts of the project as much as possible. Then it might still be realistic to continue working on it.
It should be in your contract that you are the sole dev and that the client cannot add code. At best they should be able to send a spec or feature request but not an actual PR.
I don't know how you could word it, but you could tell them to use an LLM to generate specs so that you can understand the needs and implement the features yourself (even if it's also LLM-assisted).
By forcing us to go through devices completely controlled by US companies?
reply