I just like to mention my experience because it is so easy to take the piss on folk that wear Five Fingers, but they can be legitimately great.
They still look hideous and there is a place for form over function in our society, so in some measure, the piss is worth taking against Five Fingers. I’ll agree with you though that Five Fingers helped me identify what I needed different in footwear even though I only used them for a couple of months to find a better alternative.
I had similar symptoms as you and also tried the Five Fingers. I had similar healing experience. However I hated the feeling of these shoes with putting them on and taking them off. I realized what I liked was the lightweight footwear, neutral lift with a wider toe box, and a midfoot strike.
I found racing flats gave me everything I liked about Five Fingers, with nothing that I hated about Five Fingers, and they look like regular shoes.
Step 3: All expenses paid trip to Fort Leavenworth
Seeing the news stories about young military staff selling secrets to our adversaries is shocking on how cheap military secrets go for these days. I remember reading a story that China was paying a sailor something like $20k or $40k for highly classified weapon system specifications. I’m stunned that these military folks were selling out their nation for the equivalent of a clapped out Ford Mustang.
The muscle car dealership right outside of basic, that is a trap.
Oh, so he likes to lie about himself? There is CLEARLY one tattoo missing that has consumed a significant amount of his life.
And I wonder if I should, sometime in the future, apply to those wards managed by the same people that 2 years ago rejected and outright ignored me, because it’s always good to have a plan b on the back burner and I’m running out of managers within my hospital I haven’t interviewed with.
You know your industry better than I do, but my industry-agnostic answer would be: “Yes, absolutely apply if it moves your career forward”. Even horrible bosses/departments can be useful as stepping stones. Many times these are open and others are avoiding them because the environment/boss sucks. If you can do a year in that department/boss as a springboard to a higher position elsewhere, I typically think its worth it.
I just can’t understand why companies do this weird shit, I always thought order earlier = arrive faster, this is just… weird)
My guess is you’re seeing a tiny view of a global logistics company at work. There are warehouses all over the place and there is large overlap with the inventory in each. Lets say you’re ordering a hot pink Kindle ebook reader. If you were able to see from the Amazon side, you’d see this item represented in dozens of warehouses all over the world. There is possibly one sitting on the shelf in the warehouse right down the street from you, which would ship it to you the fastest. However, that warehouse also contains other inventory that is in high demand and that other inventory is NOT in other warehouses. So the Amazon algorithms don’t want to direct fulfillment of your order from this close warehouse to you because its getting crushed right now.
Instead it finds the hot pink Kindle in a slow warehouse much farther away from you and your order is fulfilled from there (your first order with the long shipping time). Later, the close warehouse runs out of the high-demand inventory that was keeping it busy. You make second order for the hot pink Kindle and the algorithm now optimizes for cheapest/fastest delivery, which is the warehouse down the street from you (your second order).
Welcome to global logistics.
Additionally, making more money is MUCH easier when you have money too start with.
I was one of these. I started my IRA in my 20s with what little money I could put into it. When I left a job I’d roll my 401k back into my IRA under the same Edward Jones advisor.
After over more than 20 years I started questioning it. I asked for statements of all of my deposits. I took those dates and deposit amounts and plugged them into a basic historical simulator to see what would have happened if I put the same money into an S&P500 fund. My real investment account was over $40,000 lower than had I just put the money in myself into the S&P500. I dropped that advisor and transferred my entire balance into VTSAX and never looked back. Future deposits went into my own brokerage into boring index funds from then on.
I credit Edward Jones with making saving for retirement stupid easy for myself a dumb 22 year old at the time. However, I should have wised up sooner and it cost me at least $40,000 for my naïveté.
If investing in the S&P 500 is such a surefire way to make money, then why isn’t everyone doing it?
First, lots and LOTS of people (and companies do it).
Three reasons people don’t do it:
hard to replace.
I’m glad you phrased it as “hard to replace” because everyone is replaceable, and that’s something that some in IT don’t realize until its too late.
become extremely valuable
This is also good. Most in IT think this means “be the best at the technology” but really it means “be able to interface with non-IT about IT, up to and including leadership”. Soft skills are most IT folks’ Achilles Heel.
I feel like everywhere I work, we have this term, and it’s become increasingly more common over the past decade as the USA becomes more and more hateful and aggressive towards the working class people… The offshore team. I really, really hate hearing about the offshore team
…and…
then you see the USA and how We have millions of computer science grads who struggle to find work, can’t get a job
There’s a couple factors in play and depending on how old you are (or how long you’ve been in this industry) some things may not be apparent.
IT spending/staffing is cyclical. Boom and bust. This happens every 5-8 years. There is massive spending by organizations in IT for various reasons. This drives up the need for IT staff and as the talent pool is exhausted, salaries rise sharply as companies try to poach from one another. IT workers win in this case. However, when the pendulum swings expensive IT staff are on the chopping block. For the cycle we’re in right now, that started about a year ago and the cuts are still ongoing, but to me, it feels like it will start swinging back in the other direction in the next 8-12 months with hiring picking up again.
In-source vs Outsource/ onshoring vs offshoring cycle - Many businesses have short memories and “the grass is always greener” mentality. If they are heavily In-sourced and onshore they look at their budgets and see this MASSIVE number next to the “payroll” line item. They start asking how they can lower this number and save money. Consultants come in and convince them that the company can save money by cutting out a segment of the company’s operations and outsourcing that to another firm that quotes them an attractive rate. The company chooses this option, fires their own staff, contracts out the work. The bottom line is appropriately attractive, and executives get a bonus for making cost cuts. Inertia from the previous staff keeps the org going much as before for awhile. However, the service begins suffers because the contract company is attempting to provide the least amount of resources and money to fulfill the contract. Many times this means using offshore staffing themselves. After a few expensive outages for outright rebellions from the company business departments, the company fires the contracting company hires their own staff again and brings the service back in house. This pendulum swings again for another 8-10 years.
International pay disparity - IT workers in the USA are crazy expensive compared to nearly anywhere else in the work. I’m not just talking about a little more, but by a factor of 10 or 15 times more expensive than other nations that provide similar skilled staff. A $150k USD IT worker in the USA can be replaced (mostly) with a $15k USD worker in India with the same level of skill. That same IT worker skill level would earn $75k-$100k CAD in Canada. In Germany that same worker would earn €60-$90. During boom times that USA worker might be able to earn $175k-$300k USD.
As a worker, you can see that working in the USA will earn you the most money when you can get a job. So the trick is to save during the boom times knowing the bust is coming. If you earn $300k for one year, and are unemployed for two years afterward you’ve effectively earned $100k per year for 3 years straight. Being unemployed in IT for over a year is unusual. You can usually find a lower paying job in IT to cover your living expenses and then some until the boom occurs again.
I mean, imagine a future where every computer is just a chromebook, phones are no longer phones but just a “terminal” that streams the actual OS which runs in the cloud.
It will get close to happening for nearly all computing, then it will swing back the other way to local storage and compute, then after 15-20 years it will swing back toward centralized compute and storage. This has already happened 3 times.
Original computing was mainframes. “Dumb terminals” that had zero local storage and only the most rudimentary compute power to handing the incoming data and display it, and take keystrokes, encode them, and send them on.
Then “personal computers” became a thing with the advent of cheap CPUs. Dumb Terminals/mainframes were largely discarded and everyone had their own computer on their desk with their won compute and storage. Then the Netware/Banyan era began and those desktop computers were networked to have some remote shared storage. (there’s a slightly different branching with Sun/HPUX/DigitalUnix and Workstation grade hardware)
Then Citrix WinFrame and Sun Ray stateless thin clients showed up once again swinging the compute and storage almost entirely remotely to centralized heavy powered servers with (mostly) dumb terminals, but these were graphic interfaces like MS Windows or Xwindow.
Once again, powerful desktop CPUs showed up with the Pentium II etc compute was back under users desks.
Now phones and tablets with cloud has show up, and you’re asking the question.
So what I think will swing primary compute and storage back to the user side (handheld now) is again, cheap compute and storage on the device. Right now so many services are cloud based because the massive compute and storage requirements only exist in volume in the cloud. However, bandwidth is still limited. Imagine when the next (next?) generation of mobile CPUs arrive, and with a tiny bit of power you could do today’s bitcoin mining on your phone or process AI datasets with ease in the palm of your hand. And why would you send the entire dataset to the cloud when you can process it locally and then send the result?
So the pendulum keeps swinging; centralized and distributed, back and forth.
There’s lots of really good reasons why HVAC techs aren’t cutting on pipe in a building. Having the proper pipefitters/plumbers making those changes which doesn’t actually change any function is expensive, so I could see that money not being spent.
Looking at the final product, it looks like the HVAC folks could have acquired a larger vent grill and place the grill parallel to the tiles for cosmetic appeal even though the ducting wouldn’t take up the whole grill.
“largest worldwide non-violent protests in history”? I remember living through that time and don’t remember that. Do you have a source? I myself was opposed the second Iraq war because Saddam had agreed to let in any inspectors the west wanted but we went “too late, we’re coming in anyway” and I knew it was a scam invasion.
We were also just a couple of years into Afghanistan and it made no sense to be starting a second war on a second front when there was no immanent danger. Again, it made to sense.
Was this possibly a building with retrofitted ducting? As in when it was built it had boilers for heating only, and later the building was modified to have ducting for AC (so the ducting had to follow whatever non-straight lines were possible).
Others have suggested professional counseling. Thats the right answer. Do that.
I can tell you even without the emotional baggage you’re carrying, getting started on your own in life is hard and confusing. There’s no book that tells you everything you need to do (and when) and what NOT to do that will cost you time and money you don’t have at that stage of life.
If you are under the impression that others launch successfully into independence without issue, let me remove that idea. All of us, even with massive support from our families had difficulty. You’ve got some extra difficulties on top of what others have. Don’t despair when its not going right. That doesn’t mean you’re a failure.
The perspective and the idea of a co-op however is completely different from what you describe: to distribute the hardships, the risks and rewards right from the start onto many shoulders. There’s no more “my company, my sacrifices” etc. It’s all we.
That sounds great, but how does that translate into real-world scenarios that organizations experience? As an example:
How do co-ops decide who needs to be fired when there isn’t enough money to cover payroll?
I guess my question is why do ML theorists think workers can organize enough to run a state when they can’t organize enough to run a business?
I’m not a Marxist, but my understanding of the theory is the difference between having all the the resources available to a nation-state to re-organize the state vs having to work with the meager resources provided by the existing state while working side that state’s existing restrictive system.
I don’t know, it seems the whole argument seems to boil down to “there’s not enough time, money or skill”.
“money” - what does money mean after you’ve toppled the state? Do you need money for rent? No. There’s no rule of law that will evict you from your home if you don’t pay your rent. Do you need money for food? No (in the short term). You break open the stores to take what food you need and is needed to feed the populous. The “money” problem can also be for required material resources the specific service you’re trying to set up. If you need something to carry out the will of the new state, you take it from whoever has it (which under Marxism usually means from the ruling elite), so that’s not a problem under this system.
“time” - The nation-state has been toppled. You don’t need to go to your wage job anymore for your life essentials. You’ve got all the time in the day you can dedicate to setting up the new state.
“skill” - If you have the skill to do the job but couldn’t do that job before because it didn’t pay you a living wage, that problem is now gone. The state will provide for your means, and you will do job X which the state needs done. If the state doesn’t have someone with a skill, the state will provide free education to train up citizens who will then be skilled enough to do job X needed by the state.
So none of those are actual problems on paper under Marxist because its generally applied to the nation-state level, not working in micro within an existing oppressive regime.
I say “on paper” because Marxist itself is flawed because it requires humans to act purely altruistically forever, and frankly thats beyond the capacity for humanity. Or said another way, Marxism would work great if there were no humans involved, which defeats the purpose of Marxism.
That particular post is a combination of poor English grammar, is deeply referential to pop culture, and also has missing/skipped/misspelled words. Don’t feel bad its hard to parse.
Here is his post corrected:
Does that make sense now?