tempguy9999

I've rarely had any of that. Mainly I get pervasive bad management from poor but well-meaning managers.

Only thing I can think of is a long time ago being told if you hit this deadline here's £X thousand pound bonus for the team. We hit the deadline, they made me redundant next day and told me I wouldn't be getting my share because "you should have got it in writing"[0]

I took them to court and won eventually. Good fun.

[0] Which was a) true but b) plain nasty. Worth repeating at this point, the 3 laws of contracting:

1. Get it in writing

2. Get it in writing

3. Get it in writing

Hmm, never thought about it either. I'd guess a contraction of "for each value..."

Ah, hollerith from TheRegister? If so, hail and well met.

I've no more information than what I posted. I can pretty safely assume she wasn't a streetwalker (they don't make much, I do not envy them at all).

Because I guess some significant proportion of the homeless are mentally ill and their behaviour and hygiene can be bad.

I was in a large tube station in london a few months ago and there was an overwhelming stench. The women working there were holding their noses. I was gagging. I asked where the smell was coming from, assuming it was a sewage problem. "From him" one repied, pointing to a guy limping away. He was quite a distance down the corridor, yet reeking the place out.

I think cases like those (due to severe illness) have to be handled by government or at least collectively. I don't think it's something individuals can take on.

'normal' people who've fallen on hard times, well that's entirely another matter. There but for the grace of god go any one of us.

Perhaps you should not assume stuff. Not all prostitutes dislike their work; https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21346209

Now, an actual fact, I knew a guy, a licensed accountant, about 20 years ago who did the accounts of a working lady (ok, prostitute). He said she was pulling in about £80,000/year. He didn't say whether she liked her job so I can't help you there.

Quite possibly not, but if there aren't toilets, or if the people have literally no inside place to sleep, or if they're homeless due to mental illness, a turd on your doorstep is a symptom of a bigger problem. Agree or disagree?

Difference between 'regulate' and 'prevent' certain types of businesses, I guess.

Do any cities have laws which state certain areas are ok for prostitutes to work in? I'd guess not

Might shock you but some prostitutes do enjoy their work. I guess it's the higher paid, non-streetwalkers though.

edit: "[...] she stated that she enjoyed her job as a prostitute [...]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monica_Coghlan#After_the_trial

> Everyone is cool from afar with sexwork until a meth head is jerking it on their doorstep

You are confusing or conflating sex work with drug use.

> Everyone is cool from afar with homeless until they're sleeping in their own doorway

I would be ok with that; you don't speak for me.

> self-righteously

Yeah, sure. None of your post reflects on your self-centredness.

OMG at the bottom of the page is a link to a bat-bomb

"Bat bombs were an experimental World War II weapon developed by the United States. The bomb consisted of a bomb-shaped casing with over a thousand compartments, each containing a hibernating Mexican free-tailed bat with a small, timed incendiary bomb attached. Dropped from a bomber at dawn, the casings would deploy a parachute in mid-flight and open to release the bats, which would then disperse and roost in eaves and attics in a 20–40-mile radius (32–64 km). The incendiaries, which were set on timers, would then ignite and start fires in inaccessible places in the largely wood and paper constructions of the Japanese cities that were the weapon's intended target."

That's ingenious, and even more horrific.

Wellll, you jest but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Pigeon

"During World War II, Project Pigeon (later Project Orcon, for "organic control") was American behaviorist B.F. Skinner's attempt to develop a pigeon-controlled guided bomb."

You misread my post. I agree with you completely (excepting the snide Wobegone effect comment, which I had to look up but at least I learnt something today).

I don't like this kind of writing. Even the first para falls apart at the first poking.

> In the modern world, science has become the ultimate guide for describing reality.

I'm an atheist but I recognise that religion does exactly that function for the religious.

> and with such an appearance of impartiality, that we feel satisfied with its answers and seek nothing more

So climate change is fully agreed upon by everyone and anti-vaxxers don't exist. Sure.

Some quick digging regarding proportion of use of crude for energy vs chemical products:

"This demand for chemical products has a direct impact on energy demand (and consequently CO2 emissions). The sector accounts for approximately 11% and 8% respectively of the global primary demand for oil and natural gas."

https://www.iea.org/newsroom/news/2018/june/commentary-from-...

So my 99% and 95% estimate was way off, if I'm reading this correctly - which I may not, as it seems to be referring to energy used to create chemical products, not necessarily the proportion of oil used as chemical precursors. Best I can find though.

I can't find figures but I expect the amount of crude used for fuel is very high compared to its other uses. Maybe 99% but that's just a guess. I'll try to find figures tomorrow (it's late here). Let's call it 95% for now.

If 95% of energy is not burnt but extracted for other uses then it stays in the ground 20 times longer (ok, not forever).

But we have no way of replacing that huge energy source that is crude. So we will not stop because there's no alternative. What he suggests is a counsel of perfection - "precise and also correct", I agree, but it's not going to happen. So it's a useless suggestion AFAICS.

Basically I'm confused as to what he's suggesting.

@saiya-jin: You complained about anti-china news, I asked you for something more positive - I'm still interested.

I just meant not paying millions to some people (especially if they do a bad job) while others get paid very marginally indeed with no chance of improving that.

> "Needs to stay in the ground" says extraction must stop.

If burning it releases carbon which we can't viably recapture, which you acknowledge[0], then saying...

> That is not the case.

...is wrong. Unless you mean climate change causes by anthropogenic carbon release isn't happening.

[0] "you are correct there is currently no commercially-viable way to make it carbon-neutral" (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21325863)

What other ways are there that are commercially viable now?

Yes, let's give the natives a breeding bonus! That'll solve it.

> but one is an economic policy and a result of the other

I don't see that unfettered immigration need be linked to capitalism, just the belief people can move around freely being OK.

> increase competition and lower their wages (immigration), whilst railing against capitalism

I'd guess they are railing not against immigrants that undercut their £8/hour bar work but the executives at the top of companies that can earn millions, even many millions a year, while the yoof serve them drinks from the bar at £8/hour. Even more so when those executives prove incompetent or corrupt.

> Ideology has gone so far as to confuse young Americans

Well I'm a brit an not young but I guess their ideology is "I'd like to be treated with economic decency", which I support.

> like Saudi Arabia

It gets some hate, whether it's proper measure thereof, I dunno. Good question.

> China deserves all the bashing it gets

For clarity it would be helpful not to conflate the entirety of china with the chinese govt.

> are very biased only and precisely against it

Probably talking about "crushed bodies and broken bones". Rather sets the tone, don't you think?

OK, genuinely: give us some good news stories that are genuine (ie. not chinese government propaganda). It would be nice to hear another side.

> And this is why China is hated passionately in the West

No it isn't, it's the government that we find deeply grubby. And this subject is unrelated to china.

Dear website, going to your page show me 2.7KBytes of story text, and with that downloads over 20MBytes of other stuff (mainly as large hi-res images scaled to thumbnails).

If you wish to abuse my bandwidth like that I must regrettably decline to continue.

yours sincerely etc. etc.

I went from a stream of permanently money-scarce small businesses that had to work within tight means, to one that was small but with almost unlimited cash, where bugger all got done because there was no pressure from deadlines - why worry about making money if you're never going to run out?

My takeaway: abundant money can be poison.

On the nail. Automation is a tool not a solution, and like any tool its best use depends on context - including not to use that tool at all. Thanks for the reminder.

Exactly!

I acknowledge your point but somewhat relatedly, my washing machine is just as advanced as it needs to be.

Very much on point, and I learned something. Ta.