11–20 of 123 posts
CEO's? Really? Walking into a conversation with a CEO with this stereotype in mind surely impacts the conversation, no?
Is "stun-locked" from a video game I don't play or TV show I don't watch? A lot of the psychologizing and self-diagnosis in this post could be cut out if the author realized he was simply being verbally abused by an asshole. Which he was. No need for the "red" and "green" stuff. "Why" rarely matters, and even less often is something you can do anything about, while choosing your response is. Sometimes that response s…
"Do I have to feel that I grasp the "Warrior" mentality in order to tell someone they're being rude?" Yes, that's exactly the point made in the article. How did you manage to miss that point, Chad, you fuckin' asshole?
I don't understand why is he letting the other people to define that there should be a conflict? For instance, in salary negotiations - I don't get why so many people (in IT) are opposed to idea of open salaries or at least a professional organization.
The people usually opposed are the ones who wish to maintain some sort of control.
Rock ’Em Sock ’Em Strawmen!
I don't understand why is he letting the other people to define that there should be a conflict? For instance, in salary negotiations - I don't get why so many people (in IT) are opposed to idea of open salaries or at least a professional organization.
Open salaries will bring down the salary of anyone willing to negotiate.
I don't understand why is he letting the other people to define that there should be a conflict? For instance, in salary negotiations - I don't get why so many people (in IT) are opposed to idea of open salaries or at least a professional organization.
I think it's fairly easy for these models to fail at bringing in experts because they put extreme downward pressure on the gains from expertise and aggressively enforce regression to the mean. If someone makes twice as much as someone else you have to justify it not just in terms of market demand and a personal outlook on the skillset but also in terms of the morale effects of paying someone else twice as much openly. I'm not sure that's good for many parties and I'm quite certain it's bad for at least some. I think the likely effect is fewer people in security and fewer people in AI at the companies that do these things.
I don't understand why is he letting the other people to define that there should be a conflict? For instance, in salary negotiations - I don't get why so many people (in IT) are opposed to idea of open salaries or at least a professional organization.
The people usually opposed are the ones who wish to maintain some sort of control.
I don't understand why is he letting the other people to define that there should be a conflict? For instance, in salary negotiations - I don't get why so many people (in IT) are opposed to idea of open salaries or at least a professional organization.
Many people feel open salaries and professional organizations inadequately handle specializations. In University sectors there have been effects like: CS lecturers not allowed to be paid more because positions are harder to fill vs say Fine Art History lecturers. I'm not saying that's bad overall, but I can certainly see why CS lecturers might not like it. I think it's fairly easy for these models to fail at bringing…
Why does this sound backwards to me? If a position is hard to fill, wouldn't you want to pay the person more so that they don't leave?
Conversely, if a position is easy to fill, wouldn't the university pay less, since if the person leaves they'll be easy to replace?
How does paying someone less because their position is hard to fill make any kind of sense? What am I missing here?
To use his first example, when he's being insulted why spin off into emotional-analysis neverland? What's happening there is you're being abused by an asshole, and you should respond to said abuse and, once that situation is resolved, examine the real issue more thoroughly.
I'm speaking as someone who used to think exactly like this guy. What I realized in early college was: In general, no one cares. No one cares if you're partially wrong, no one cares if you're a little off or awkward, no one beyond your family/SO and close friends gives a flying fuck about your emotions. Nor will they remember a slight moment of awkwardness a week later. They're simply far too consumed with their own lives for it to matter. Demanding perfect social interactions is paralyzing, irrational and not expected.
He does arrive at some appropriate conclusions ("Know thy worth"), but all the analogies and self-analysis he does isn't "emotional processing", it's simple insecurity. IMO the only emotions he's processing in those moments are fear and anxiety.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many people feel open salaries and professional organizations inadequately handle specializations. In University sectors there have been effects like: CS lecturers not allowed to be paid more because positions are harder to fill vs say Fine Art History lecturers. I'm not saying that's bad overall, but I can certainly see why CS lecturers might not like it. I think it's fairly easy for these models to fail at bringing…
"CS lecturers not allowed to be paid more because positions are harder to fill vs say Fine Art History lecturers" Why does this sound backwards to me? If a position is hard to fill, wouldn't you want to pay the person more so that they don't leave? Conversely, if a position is easy to fill, wouldn't the university pay less, since if the person leaves they'll be easy to replace? How does paying someone less because th…