ceuk

High dimensionality, more granular interpretation/models of the world. More conscious/deliberate behaviour, less benefit from neurological canalisation.

I don't think you're seeing ineptitude, I think you're seeing lucidity, sapience.

Came here to say the same thing, seems like a bit of a glaring thing to not address since I imagine "isn't it being a parent as opposed to being pregnant" is probably one of the first questions a lot of people would ask

Assuming this is a genuine question and not just intellectual posturing the obvious answer if you've ever spoken to.. most people.. is that a lot of the (admittedly somewhat simple) concepts in the book are for whatever reason, not part of the general public psyche

A lot of universities have "schools" too e.g. business school. But we wouldn't call them school students either..

I think I typed something like that originally but my phone autocorrect didn't like it. Assumed Segway was the American spelling

Yeah, very badly worded sorry. It's almost always at your "probationary review" when you either lose your job or get your position confirmed (or your probation extended in some cases).

Completely agree with your comment about any surprises being a big fail. I made a similar point even. Not well done

Basically, once you've worked somewhere in the UK for 2+ years you generally have some statutory/default protections. One of which is a set of laws around unfair or "constructive" dismissal[1].

e.g. if we had a falling out and I fired you on the spot, you could take me to an employment tribunal. Likewise, if I made your life hell and essentially forced you to quit, it would amount to the same thing.

These laws ensure that formal, standardised disciplinary processes are followed. This makes sure that employees are subject to the same process as their peers and aren't treated unfairly and that there is a formal, documented justification if an employee is ever terminated.

From an employer POV, this is sometimes a bit annoying when an employee is a bit shit because -- barring cases of gross misconduct -- you still have to put them through the disciplinary song and dance before getting rid of them. "Managing out" is the process of essentially setting them up to fail, you put them on a PIP or something (Performance Improvement Plan) where you'd basically say "you need to be hitting these targets by this date or you're gone". A lot of the time both parties know the individual in question won't hit set targets so the whole thing often feels like a bit of theatre. Keeps things fair though and stops employers taking the piss.

I'm not an expert on US (or UK) employment law but my understanding is that terminating an employee in the US requires far less oversight/justification.

[1] https://www.gov.uk/dismissal/unfair-and-constructive-dismiss...

So I made a very vague comment about it being more tricky to get rid of employees in the UK. If you think it's not actually that hard as "it takes a bit more legal work", great.. but we still seem to generally agree. It's a bit patronising to imply I know nothing about UK employment law because we have a small difference of opinion around how robust we would say the protections are.

It was a minor anecdotal comment based on my own experience of hiring/managing employees. Maybe I'm a crap manager but I've always found it labourious to get rid of people (especially passed the 2-year mark as you say). I may as well add that my wife has worked in HR for coming up to 15 years as well and I've been privy to all sorts of juicy legal drama via her.

I generally try and give every response to me some consideration but I'm not sure what else to say. Seems like maybe you just wanted to use my comment as a segway into your point about the erosion of employee protections, which you're entitled to do of course.

What an interesting difference, I had no idea.

Seems like a good system given the context in the US. Classic American hands off approach that it's more of an unspoken rule than legislation etc :)

But anyway, in many ways I can see a system that like working very well for some of the types of people that need it most (e.g. entry level, neurodiverse etc). Makes the 6 month probation system look harsher by comparison.

In the UK (and most other places with fairly strong employee protections I imagine) it becomes pretty difficult to get rid of employees once they've been around for a while. Often involving a lengthy "managing out" process.

Given this, it's common for a 3-6 month "probation period" when starting a new role in which you can be dismissed fairly arbitrarily. This makes sense given the commitment taking on an employee represents IMO.

As a result, it's very common for people to lose their jobs within a few months of starting. Just as I imagine a lot of relationships end after a rather short period of time or then tend to persist a bit longer. Sometimes it's clear things just aren't going to work out.

She's right in that it's a bit of a rug pull to get continuously good feedback and then suddenly get terminated. There should ideally never be any surprises. I.e. you'd always usually tell the employee what will happen if x does/doesn't happen, get them to agree and then when it pans out that way, no-one is shocked. But like I said.. she's been there what, 4 months? Just move on.

I totally understand the pseudo-autistic disgust/anger at inaccurate statements. I imagine a lot of us programmers are very sensitive to them in a discipline where small inaccuracies can have big consequences and I myself am easily irked by this type of thing.

However, sometimes the inaccuracy stems from poor communication (or deliberate lying) on behalf of the communicator, but sometimes it comes from gaps in our own understanding or perspective.

Is this just a silly, shallow little thing, or have you fundamentally missed some key point?

I don't have the answer, but I think that's one of the fun parts of engaging with anyone's random creative output like this. There's always a small chance it could teach us something we didn't know before.

E.g. it made me re-evaluate what "drawing" really is. Especially in a digital context.

Is it a question of fidelity? At what point does altering individual elements (whether pixels on a screen or icons in a grid) in order to represent a larger picture become "drawing". i.e. if the pictures were much smaller and closer together would it feel like drawing?

Is it a question of uniformity of media? i.e. would this feel more like drawing if instead of pictures it was just coloured blocks?

I could go on but you get the point

I have an IQ of 148 which the educational psychiatrist who did my test told me put me in the top 0.02% of the UK. I63 is.. insane

It's pretty neat to find someone smarter than me (and actually be aware of the fact).

If it helps: I think we're all a bit broken.. But whilst the first 23 years of my life were pretty rough, I'm thriving in my late 30s.

My unsolicited advice would be to find something that makes your feel good about who you are and throw yourself into it. Life and your resilience/ability to take on challenges will get so much better with a few wins under your belt.

I also can't overestimate how valuable a supportive partner is. Step 1: make sure you're worth it. Better to be kind than clever as Bezos famously said.

I do. Should I not be?

It's sad when this happens, but I've lived in various random places in England over the last 2 decades and one of the first things I do when moving to a new area is find one of these little swimming baths for my evening swim. I have to say, outside of city centers we don't seem to be doing too bad still. I think at least 3 of the 5 I've frequented were Victorian era or at least 100 or so years old.

E: just did a quick search and apparently of the 116 listed bath buildings, most of which were constructed before 1936, only 52 remain operational or are in the process of being operational. So perhaps you're right. Real shame, these places are often so valuable for the community, especially smaller/poorer ones.

(Shout out to Withington baths[1] which was my favourite place in the world back when I was a student)

[1] https://maps.app.goo.gl/Lze2wgCF9QtisdmPA

Big project =/= Big company

e.g. WhatsApp back before the acquisition

Making it easier for people to build big, complex apps doesn't favour large organisations with lots of resources. The opposite in fact.

Any email address you choose AFAIK

It was the second question that convinced me to buy it.

FYI Google takeout lets you set regular, automatic exports of any of your Google data (e.g. you can have a backup of your YouTube subscriptions, playlists etc emailed to you every month).

Good user interface/software design is good regardless of whether it is graphical or not though.

Having a row of icons with vague meanings, or endlessly nested/badly categories menus isn't intuitive or easy.

Conversely, there are a plethora of terminal-based programs with absolutely excellent UX.

Anyone can edit a well-documented template/example config file, and a good CLI program is almost like an interactive conversation, which again is an extremely intuitive experience. It's not the fault of whether the interface is graphical or not in most cases, it's just mediocre/bad software.

> To fix them, you need to run some arcane commands

At least you can fix them.

Also, sorry can't help the cheap shot: how is typing "arcane commands" any different than clicking on "gnostic glyphs"? Anything can sound complex if you want it to :)

I'm not disputing your experiences but it's so surprising to me. I exclusively use Linux on the desktop on numerous devices, some of which seem like prime candidates for the types of issues you mention, but I've not had any major problems in literal years, especially since switching to the zen kernel.

It's always a shame when people don't like the things you do I guess.

This subject is really easy to get absorbed in. First I found myself swayed by the initial quote, and then by some of the counter-arguments.

I'm in the fortunate position of having a truly incredible relationship. It's old news now after over a decade but I remember being so blown away by almost this lifting of some dunning-kruger ceiling in terms of what a relationship could even be.

I could spend ages talking about this but that's not the point of my comment so I'll just say that the vast majority of people are not in particularly good relationships. And I'd go as far to say that most people don't know what a "good" relationship even is. The standards we set for ourselves, the standards that are set by media portrayals etc are so low and/or unhealthy.

A very small portion of readers will know what I'm talking about. When you know, you know. And when you meet another couple who are similar you can spot the dynamic almost instantly. A healthy relationship is an upward spiral of empathy, generosity, respect and kindness that builds on itself through an ever growing appreciation of the wonderful gift your partner gives you. Even after 10+ years of barely spending a day apart, it still makes my heart swell to even think of it.

Anyway, taking a step back: if I reflect on what would have happened if I had been so picky. I don't think it would have ended well. Looking back, I would have been wrong about almost everything.

Me and my partner are so different in so many ways. We shared very few interests, worked in completely different industries, and had completely different lifestyles. She worked in a large, high-end department store and was the sort of person that's easy to stereotype. She was super girly, outgoing, wore very feminine clothes etc. Just a bit of an alien to an IT nerd like me who always assumed people like her and her glamorous friends would be as shallow as a puddle.

I was wrong of course. She's an incredible woman. A titan of wisdom, warmth and wit. I still find it hard to qualify what heuristics make us so compatible but I can say they aren't any of the ones I'd have picked.

We're so pompous about the things we "want" like we even have any fucking idea about anything half the time. Once again, we exhibit our incredible blind spot when it comes to our own future change. Ask someone if they were different 10 years ago and get a resounding yes. Ask them if they will be different in 10 years and get a much less assertive answer.

We treat ourselves, our own opinions and desires as a fixed platform. We have to. But it's surely worth remembering that our journey and evolution will continue, and that any partner will be a huge agent in that metamorphosis.

A good relationship changes your values, your interests. We have morphed and grown into each other over the years, a gestalt that is greater than the sum of its parts. Her journey is mine, and vice-versa.

Another angle is one's own emotional maturity/readiness. If I had met her 5-10 years earlier, I wouldn't have been ready. I still had too much growing up to do. It took several instances of having or being a pretty bad partner in other relationships before I was finally in a place where - if nothing else - I was finally able to let my guard down.

Anyway, on balance. I think I'm probably still in camp: "don't be picky".

Should we be picky/discerning with our long term partners? Absolutely. Based on my earlier comments, most people could do better in terms of the quality of their relationship. And that usually means starting again.

Once you're in a relationship it becomes especially hard to leave. Inertia traps you in a fugue state of ambivalent acceptance. Treading water and losing years of your life in missed opportunities and experiences.

The key, I think, is throwing yourself into the rich vibrant pool of humanity and sampling as much of it as possible whilst being careful not to settle. At worst, it's a mind-broadening experience and an especially healthy activity in today's increasingly tribal society. But if you're lucky, you also may meet someone incongruous who could end up shaking the foundations of your world.

E: words