• 0 Posts
  • 16 Comments
Joined 8 months ago
cake
Cake day: March 12th, 2024

help-circle







  • You know, that would make it a lot easier, but he’s not a loser, or at least he wasn’t for the longest time. He’s done well for himself career-wise, even if it’s not exciting. He has a wife that cares about him and who he cares about. He’s the type of charismatic guy who meets someone and gets to know them, whether they’re a customer at work or the guy that helps him at the cell phone store. I have learned a lot about how to treat and respect the people I meet from him.

    He’s just really bad at taking care of himself. He’s been treating his body like it’s 20 for the past 30 years and it’s catching up to him. While he’s good at making and keeping acquaintances he’s failed to keep many close friends to confide in. When Covid hit he started drinking to the point he was hospitalized and in the years since I don’t think he has ever learned to forgive or love himself, and as long as that’s the case there is nothing anyone else can truly do for him. Which really sucks. The only hope I have is that he lives closer to family now which will make it easier to offer opportunities for him to be loved and maybe realize he can be better toward himself. But until that happens yeah he is a bit of a loser right now. I just tell him I don’t care if he is.


  • I agreed to fly across the country to drive my dad’s car back home while he drove the uhaul with his stuff. The day I fly out, he calls and tells me he’s been drinking again, the movers canceled on him, and he’s a loser.

    I get there and he’s puking up blood as he detoxes, hasn’t eaten in days, and I’m stuck with one driver and two cars. I had to ask my uncle to fly out to help instead of spending time with his son who was on military leave while my stepmother called around to find movers last minute, all while my dad complains about the pain he’s in and how he can’t sleep while taking constant naps and he’s such a loser.

    Halfway back he has a seizure in the car I’m driving and I have to help him get the bile and blood he’s choking on out of his throat while operating a vehicle at 80mph to the next exit. Afterward his memory is frazzled and it takes a couple hours for him to remember where he is and what we’re doing.

    We get home, I tell him I’m never helping him move again, his response is “but we listened to your music 90% of the way here!” This was three weeks ago.





  • Let me spoil part of the Foundation series for you. In one book, the cast visits a planet where they encounter one person with psychic powers surrounded by robot servants. He reveals that the planet is evenly divided by I think 128 people like himself who want for nothing and live comfortably. They only reproduce asexually, and only in preparation for their own death or when another dies.

    What this illustrates that’s relevant for you is that yes, not hitting the replacement rate could lead to significant population decline, but only until people are comfortable enough and want to have kids or feel it is the best way to maintain their way of life (think farmers having kids to help on the farm).



  • There would definitely still be people that want the money/authority that comes from a CEO position, they would just be held to a standard. A company is not an organization or the processes that it follows, it is the people that create and carry out those processes. If you separate the responsibility for the company from the people that make up that company you allow mistakes without real consequences for those that had a part in causing it.

    Based on what I have heard the last day, the CEO of Crowdstrike created a culture of cutting corners in the organization he is responsible for that led to a reduced focus on QA testing which in turn let this bug slip into the production machines of a significant number of other companies and organizations counting on that not happening. If the responsibility for that mistake lies with something as nebulous as “the company” then the organization may close, but the people that were responsible would be separated from the consequences of their negligence and free to move on to any other company having learned they can do the same things without being harmed personally. That sounds less than ideal.

    I think the CEO should have some consequences. Maybe not jail time (although maybe if there were people in medical situations that died because the machines being used to keep them alive were bricked) but a real fine that impacts him personally may prompt a greater drive to organize the company to avoid the issue in the future, or prevent it at future companies.