🤝 Tech skills in demand
Happy Monday!
We combined a list of helpful resources from @TundeTASH and @myfreelancehq
This thread entails TOP TEN (10)
🤝 Sites to learn Excel for free
🤝 Sites for online education
🤝 Sites for your career
🤝 Sites for interview preparation

Search for these on Google:
1. Microsoft Excel Help Center
2. Excel Exposure
3. Chando
4. Excel Central
5. Contextures
6. Excel Hero
7. Mr. Excel
8. Improve Your Excel
9. Excel Easy
10. Excel Jet

Search for these on Google:
1. Coursera
2. edX
3. Khan Academy
4. Udemy
5. iTunesU Free Courses
6. MIT OpenCourseWare
7. Stanford Online
8. Codecademy
9. Open Culture Online Courses
10. TED-Ed
1. LinkedIN
2. Indeed
3. Careerealism
4. Job-Hunt
5. JobBait
6. Careercloud
7. GM4JH
8. Personalbrandingblog
9. Jibberjobber
10. Neighbors-helping-neighbors
1. Ambitionbox
2. AceTheInterview
3. Geeksforgeeks
4. Leetcode
5. Gainlo
6. Careercup
7. Codercareer
8. interview
9. InterviewBest
10. Indiabix
1. Writing
2. Translation
3. Online tutoring
4. Editing and proofreading
5. Data Entry
6. Social Media Management
7. Virtual Assistant
8. Customer service
9. Transcription
10. Research
1. Amazon AWS
2. Digital Marketing
3. Copywriting
4. UI/UX designs
5. Web development
6. Cloud computing
7. Data analytics
8. Edge computing
9. Graphics designing
10. Blockchain
You can register via this link: https://t.co/HG9RtqwNzX

More from Education
We've been falsely told 'schools are safe', 'don't drive community transmission', & teachers don't have a higher risk of infection repeatedly by govt & their advisors- to justify some of the most negligent policies in history. 🧵
data shows *both* primary & secondary school teachers are at double the risk of confirmed infection relative to comparable positivity in the general population. ONS household infection data also clearly show that children are important sources of transmission.
Yet, in the parliamentary select meeting today, witnesses like Jenny Harries repeated the same claims- that have been debunked by the ONS data, and the data released by the @educationgovuk today. How many lives have been lost to these lies? How many more people have long COVID?
has repeatedly pointed out errors & gaps in the ONS reporting of evidence around risk of infection among teachers- and it's taken *months* to get clarity on this. The released data are a result of months of campaigning by her, the @NEU and others.
Rather than being transparent about the risk of transmission in school settings & mitigating this, the govt (& many of its advisors) has engaged in dismissing & denying evidence that's been clear for a while. Evidence from the govt's own surveys. And global evidence.
Why?
Questions have to be asked about the evidence Jenny Harries gave to the Education Committee today about the risk to teachers.
— Adam Hamdy (@adamhamdy) January 19, 2021
Was she aware of this data?
If not, why wasn\u2019t she properly briefed?#COVID19 #schools https://t.co/4wa1PyAJld pic.twitter.com/eqFjaA1zYC
data shows *both* primary & secondary school teachers are at double the risk of confirmed infection relative to comparable positivity in the general population. ONS household infection data also clearly show that children are important sources of transmission.
Yet, in the parliamentary select meeting today, witnesses like Jenny Harries repeated the same claims- that have been debunked by the ONS data, and the data released by the @educationgovuk today. How many lives have been lost to these lies? How many more people have long COVID?
has repeatedly pointed out errors & gaps in the ONS reporting of evidence around risk of infection among teachers- and it's taken *months* to get clarity on this. The released data are a result of months of campaigning by her, the @NEU and others.
Rather than being transparent about the risk of transmission in school settings & mitigating this, the govt (& many of its advisors) has engaged in dismissing & denying evidence that's been clear for a while. Evidence from the govt's own surveys. And global evidence.
Why?
You May Also Like
The entire discussion around Facebook’s disclosures of what happened in 2016 is very frustrating. No exec stopped any investigations, but there were a lot of heated discussions about what to publish and when.
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
The story doesn\u2019t say you were told not to... it says you did so without approval and they tried to obfuscate what you found. Is that true?
— Sarah Frier (@sarahfrier) November 15, 2018
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.