Well, it’s not like he’s already done trainwrecks that tarnished the reputation of multiple companies, so I’m sure we’re safe 😏

This thread is focusing on whether he’s right, even while being a shithead. The problem IMO is not whether he’s right or not, it’s what his ‘plans’ are if the world moves in the direction he starts nudging. Guy’s a psycho edgelord pro-fascist with Bond villain tendencies, but he’s surfed on trends to carve monopolies before… Idk

It seriously feels good to see this written down sometimes. I hate that religion somehow laid claim to morality.

Just insulting people will always make them buck against your points, however valid and informed. Bad approach.

The problem with radioactive waste isn’t the fact that it’s dangerous now, it’s the fact that it remains dangerous for much longer than we’re even remotely able to plan for. People will likely have to deal with that danger in waaaay longer than civilization has existed on earth so far.

So the horizontal borehole for instance: amazing idea for the next century - or even, heck, few millenia!! - but how do you make sure our ancestors in 50,000 years never drill a new borehole right there?

Nah, nah, nah. You all got it wrong. There’s one name and one name only: tech support.

These are great tricks!! I’d add one that’s always worked for me: if you can’t get your mind to go still in pt#3 above, think back of the story in a book or show you like, and let your mind wander about the characters, the story, the background, the intrigue etc. Focusing on fiction and story helps me drift back, vs focusing on real life things…

“like that” is probably the best position to see shit

Agreed with the first part of your post, but you completely loose me at “stop buying shit” being a solution.

Any meaningful massive change requires systemic and legislative frameworks that companies, political organizations and government entities have to abide by - and this framework basically modulates popular behavior. Ex: what’s available for purchase (ex: only things meeting certain profit margins or environmental criteria), who you advertise to and what you can advertise (ex: not to children, not for medication, etc), etc etc

If we expect and hope people to “wake up” and change their behaviour en masse, it’s simply never going to happen, and the large corporations and lobbies keep rubbing their hands, happy we’re guilt tripping each other rather than vote in people with clear legislative and regulatory agendas focused on actual human well-being…

Sry for the rant

Yes but if it’s anything like office chairs casters, there are 2 standard sizes (of course), the 10 and the 11 mm

Yes.

I get your point, but just playing Devil’s advocate here: don’t work in real estate because it’s fraud and landlords are thieves, don’t work for McDonald’s because your work make people fat and unhealthy, don’t work retail or manufacturing because your work encourages capitalism and all its evils…? I mean… don’t like 90% of all jobs require you to do shitty things?

Most people in HR went in the field with pretty decent intentions. They have debts and families to feed and the job they landed is sometimes for a shitty employer.

If you want to hate someone, don’t hate the HR person who’s dealing with their own shitty problems, blame the uber rich, that maintain everyone else in a constant state of infighting while they lobby or buy lawmakers to ensure the poor get poorer so they get richer. There the ones maintaining a hyper capitalistic society and making sure executives are ordering the cuts (often ending with cutting the HR folks after they finish the layoffs)

Please allow me to offer a nuance on the topic of HR. I see a lot of hate about HR on this thread and quite a bit is founded… But on the other hand, two things:

1. the HR folks themselves are not to blame for the fact that the company overhired, are cutting people, or even to some extent some shitty strategies like pretending people are fire for cause instead of laid off. It’s decided by executives ans the CEO, and HR operationalizes. I’ll fully grant though that they sometimes (often) operationalize shittily.

2. and more importantly, HR is shitty in a shitty company, and pretty decent in a (quite rare) decent company. Fundamentally HR’s job is to help manage humans as a resource, and among other tasks it means to protect the company against human-related risks. There are different fundamental beliefs and philosophies companies can have around how to avoid that risk - and their HR strategy is set accordingly.

Some decent (rare) employers believe that to avoid risks like being sued or unionizing, the best strategy is to provide employees with a healthy work environment, competitive pay and to remove toxic managers and executives quickly. In these companies HR plays a very strong policing role ensuring that managers don’t cause human related risk by abusing workers. I know it sounds idealistic and I’ll 100% grant that it applies unfortunately to a very small sample of employers, but it’s true.

Of course way more common are companies with the philosophy that to avoid these risks you need to squash people, back your managers at all cost, never admit a fault, etc - and that’s the shitty strategy operationalized by shitty a HR department.

Lastly the governmental labour laws framework of a country plays a big role too - in some countries where those laws are super weak like the US, particularly if your employer is your only way to access half decent healthcare, you can’t afford to change employer - and the shitty strategy becomes a much lower cost than the decent one (found a bit more often in Canada, way more in Europe and even more in Scandinavian countries)

Sorry for the walltext rambling

100% on the recording, fair pt.

On the letter: that’d be good - go ahead and give me written evidence…

She did really good! Almost drove it home, she was so close… As a former manager in HR, here are my two cents. Note that I’m from canada, might not apply as I have it in mind in the US. If they’re trying to frame a layoff as a firing for cause and poor performance, her first way of handling it is excellent. Ask pointed specific questions on what about your performance was lacking and more importantly can you demonstrate to me that I’ve been communicated clear quantifiable and Timely objectives that I’ve been communicated means and ways to be coached and trained to meet those objectives and that I’ve been communicated milestones of me not meeting objectives, with proper corrective measures and coaching to then change course before a firing for poor performance.

If you can’t communicate any of these to me, the objectives, my performance against his objectives, the milestones, and the coaching I received to meet objectives when I did not, then this is not a poor performance related firing. If you’re missing any of these information then I am not yet terminated and I am at your employment until a subsequent meeting where you can come back with that information. On the other hand if what you meant to say is that this is a layoff because you have hired too many people, and that this letting Go has nothing to do with my performance, okay no problem, let’s talk, but in this case it will be with X months of severance and a glowing recommendation letter.

Lastly I want to make you aware that I’ve recorded this conversation, in which it’s now clearly documented that you have no clear tangible indication of any notion of documented poor performance about me, and thus I am still at the employed of my employer until you either provide those, or provide me with coaching that I then fail to put into practice to meet objectives, or until you come back with the severance package for a layoff that has nothing to do with my performance.

Something along those lines…

0.01$ super salty fries, 80% ice 1500% overpriced drinks FTW

How many pebbles in a stone, and stone in a boulder? It’s a convenient measurement, I’m sure.

I don’t know what you millenial z’s or something keep complaining about - just buy a detached single family house with a backyard in the city for 125k and pay up your 1% interest rate mortgage within 10 years while your wife keeps it clean and drinks herself to death while resenting you daily, like any civilized 30 year old with a job for life and guaranteed payout pension does!

Is the /s really necessary?

Wrong place to post - this is just high quality content

Wait, am I the only one disturbed by the “be 19” and the “meet a cutie 14 girl”?

I mean none of these are ever true but it still feels bleeh to read!

I’m a xennial, and i think one of the key characteristics of my generation is that we grew up with tech becoming omnipresent, but it was also non user friendly tech.

We started having PCs young, but we really had to know how to build our systems, it was much less plug and play. We grew up with visual OSs, but configuring that shit was not intuitive at all. Or outright broken (looking at you Win ME). We had to troubleshoot, fix, learn, read and test just to get our tech working.

Younger generations grew up with tech omnipresent yes, but tech that mostly works intuitively - you barely ever have to really figure shit out, fix it or reconfigure it.

Just my 2 cents!