与「Wednesday」相关的搜索结果

RECAP: -The U.S.-Iran exchange exploded. The U.S. struck Iran again Wednesday and downed Iranian drones. Iran says it fired on four ships in Hormuz, then claimed it hit a U.S. airbase in retaliation. -Kuwait activated its air defenses against "hostile" missile and drone attacks. Likely tied to the IRGC retaliation, since Kuwait hosts major U.S. bases. -Israel escalated hard in Lebanon, striking over 150 Hezbollah sites and issuing evacuation orders for buildings in Tyre. Netanyahu authorized more intense attacks even as the deal is meant to end that war. -Politico says the Pentagon has quietly staged the troops and warships for a Cuba invasion. All it needs is Trump's green light. -AP reports: the Trump administration told Miami prosecutors to stand down on Venezuela's acting president as oil deals flow. Same pause reportedly hit Colombia's Petro. -The Pentagon is in talks to fund U.S. drone makers. The U.S. builds 100,000 drones a year. Ukraine built 4 million. -A Google engineer was charged with using insider company data to win $1.2 million on Polymarket.

Profits of China's major industrial firms increased 18.2 percent year on year during the January-April period, surpassing a rise of 15.5 percent in the first quarter, official data showed Wednesday. #DataTellsChina# #ChinaEconomy#

#CEIndex# Profits of China's major industrial firms increased 18.2 percent year on year during the January-April period, surpassing a rise of 15.5 percent in the first quarter, official data showed Wednesday.

LATEST: ⚡️ XRP Ledger will roll out the fixCleanup3_1_3 upgrade on Wednesday, deleting expired NFT offers automatically and patching bugs in domain settings, vault withdrawals, and loan accounting.

China's major industrial firms posted profits of 2.44 trillion yuan ($360 billion) in the first four months of 2026, marking an 18.2% increase from a year earlier, the National Bureau of Statistics said on Wednesday.

At Meta, 90% of my coworkers were Chinese, and non-Chinese were routinely excluded, disadvantaged, and targeted for layoffs. 6 out of the 7 layoffs I observed targeted non-Chinese despite non-Chinese being the vast minority. Certain orgs like ads and MRS are notorious for being Chinese dominated. I think Americans would be outraged if they knew that their own citizens were getting marginalized and laid off at their own companies, while Chinese promote themselves up, conquer entire orgs, and reap millions. Imagine if Huawei in Shenzhen had entire orgs and leadership chains completely dominated by Japanese people who brazenly spoke Japanese at work without a care in the world that their Chinese coworkers don't understand, imposed their own work culture without respecting Chinese culture, excluded the Chinese, and laid off Chinese people while promoting their own. I imagine Chinese citizens would be outraged, and never allow that to happen in the first place. The most blatant and obvious way that non-Chinese are excluded is that Chinese primarily speak Mandarin at work. I'm not talking about one-off conversations, I'm talking about every single conversation. Loudly and brazenly with no respect for others. 10+ teammates and leaders having a group conversation in Mandarin while the 2 non-Chinese don't understand and feel excluded from the team. Although everyone at least has the decency to speak English during formal meetings with a non-speaker present, it was common that right after the meeting ended everyone would immediately switch to Mandarin. Funny I'm in Korea right now and was just on a double date with 3 other Koreans, and I was shocked that when the conversation would split into two, the other couple would speak to each other in English in my presence just out of respect. A Korean couple on a double-date had the courtesy to speak to each other in English in front of me even though I'd never expect that from them, but my Chinese coworkers did not. Lunch was another place where non-Chinese were blatantly excluded. Recall that the team I joined was an all Chinese team with only one other non-Chinese person. The Chinese would always get lunch together and never invite us (except for one of them who occasionally would, though at some point stopped). Me and the non-Chinese person would invite them, they'd always refuse, and then shortly after they'd disappear and get lunch together. As a result, it was usually just the two of us getting lunch. (caveat, some of the newer Chinese who joined afterwards also experienced similar treatment. So it's moreso a clique thing than a Chinese vs. non-Chinese thing, though 100% of the clique was Chinese) On Wednesdays and Fridays I'd often be the only non-Chinese person on my team in the office, and they'd all get lunch together without inviting me. It was depressing, and made me not want to come into the office on those days. One team dinner we went to a Korean BBQ. I arrived with a non-Chinese coworker and the first table was full, so we sat at one end of the next empty table. Shortly after one of the Tech Leads walked in, and sat at the complete opposite end of our table, alone and not in talking distance to anyone. We invited her over, and she declined. Later another Tech Lead came in and sat across from her. Non-Chinese and Chinese at opposite ends of a long table at a team dinner, and they refused to sit with us. Eventually more people came and the TLs joined our side because I guess maybe it was too obviously anti-social, and they spent the entire dinner speaking speaking Chinese to each other. These were our tech leads. I could not understand how Meta could have "Tech Leads" that so blatantly excluded teammates. I thought Tech Leads were supposed to uplift the team, and that Meta would hold tech leads to a higher standard. Now someone might say that it's just lunch or a one-off team dinner, who cares? To that I vehemently disagree. Lunch is extremely important for team bonding, and so much information is transferred through informal socializing. I'm not saying that everyone needs to get lunch together everyday, but if a minority of people are excluded from getting lunch with the rest of the team, and especially the most tenured and senior employees, then naturally that minority is going to feel alienated, disadvantaged, and excluded from opportunities. And the very fact that they're excluded from lunch is reflective of being excluded in general. When 90% of an org and the entire leadership chain is dominated by one ethnicity, naturally their work culture is going to spill through. Chinese culture is completely different from American work culture, and learning to navigate that was a huge obstacle for me. For example I'm the type that tends to question everything and isn't afraid to challenge a "superior", but I quickly realized that my TL seemed to take offense to that, and would punish/retaliate me for it. I want to make it clear - I have nothing against Chinese people. Most of them are very kind (strong correlation between kindness and not engaging in the kind of exclusionary behavior I mentioned above), and I have many good friends who are Chinese. I get that some barely speak English (though I question how they got hired). I do genuinely believe that most are good people, and not deliberately trying to exclude others. But regardless of intent, the result is that non-Chinese get excluded. The fact that 6 of the 7 layoffs I observed were not Chinese in a 80-90% Chinese dominated org is testament to this. The fact that 90% Chinese dominated orgs even exist in the first place is testament to this. I might not even be posting about this given the sensitivity of the topic if not for the fact that I've seen and/or heard stories of some very toxic people who I do not believe would otherwise survive if not for their ability to exclude others, throwing others under the bus for the next layoff. The same people do this over and over again, and get away with it because they're part of the "clique" that essentially has immunity. I think the company needs to take this more seriously. Some ideas would be enforcing English at the office (I've heard of other teams that do this), raising leaders to a higher bar when it comes to team inclusivity (eg. under the "People" axis), investigating potential discrimination cases (eg. layoffs and/or mistreatment disproportionally affecting certain groups) and having a zero tolerance policy around that, having a zero tolerance policy around injustice in general (eg. lying or deliberately throwing somebody under the bus), ensuring more diverse teams, etc. But to be honest, I don't have faith that much would change so long as the entire leadership chain up to the VP level is dominated by the same ethnicity, language, and culture. Nor does it seem that leadership even remotely cares given that this has been happening in the HQ for probably at least the last decade, and is obvious to anyone who's stepped foot in the office.

🏆 WEDNESDAY'S FINAL SCORES 🏆 SGA shines as the @okcthunder win Game 2 to even the series at 1-1 in the NBA Conference Finals presented by @Google! Alex Caruso: 17 PTS, 5 AST, 3 3PM Game 3: Friday, 8:30pm/et on NBC & Peacock

Mark Zuckerberg told employees in a Wednesday memo that laying off 8,000 workers was necessary because “success isn’t a given.” The full memo, as published by businessinsider. "Hey everyone, I want to express my gratitude to everyone leaving today for all of the hard work you've put into serving our community. It's always sad to say goodbye to people who have contributed to our mission and to building this company. I feel the weight of that, and I'm spending a lot of time making sure we manage this as well as possible. This is the most dynamic I have seen our industry. I'm optimistic about everything we're building to give billions of people the power to express themselves and connect with the people they care about. I'm also optimistic about delivering personal superintelligence to everyone. We've always focused on putting power in people's hands. This is how we believe progress is made in the world. These values are what makes us different, and they are why Meta has been successful. But success isn't a given. AI is the most consequential technology of our lifetimes. The companies that lead the way will define the next generation. We're transforming our company to make sure it will always be the best place for talented people to have the greatest impact. People tell us that they appreciate the ability to take greater ownership and execute their vision with less bureaucracy and management to navigate. At the same time, we also want to provide everyone with as much stability as possible. We won't always get this balance right, but I care deeply about this so we'll keep adjusting and work hard to do right by people along the way. To that end, I want to be clear that we do not expect other company-wide layoffs this year. I also want to acknowledge that we haven't been as clear as we aspire to be in our communication, and that's one area I want to make sure we improve. I'm confident in what we're all building together. We are one of the few companies positioned to help define the future. Meta has the talent, the infrastructure, the apps and distribution, and the business model. We have a lot of work ahead, but what's on the other side is going to be extraordinary. Once again, I'm grateful to those leaving today. And I'm grateful to everyone around the company for all of the historic work we will continue doing together. Mark" --- businessinsider .com/heres-what-mark-zuckerberg-said-about-future-layoffs-at-meta-2026-5

The US House voted 396-13 Wednesday to pass a bipartisan housing affordability bill that would limit large investors from buying single-family homes while still allowing new housing construction. The White House backed the revised bill after lawmakers removed a Senate provision requiring major investors with 350 or more units to sell newly built rental homes within seven years. Housing, rental, and construction groups supported the change. The bill now heads back to the Senate, where its path is uncertain. Lawmakers remain divided over how far Congress should go in restricting build-to-rent housing and investor ownership.