Let’s be honest: children are usually forced on people. It was simply an expectation of your family and society in general for you to have children. This pressure is gone in western societies.
"How dare you asking me when I will have children?"
It’s also not necessary to have kids for retirement anymore.
Look at the top 3 countries with the highest fertility rates over the last 10 years:
Thanks to inequality, the rich[1] can already afford surrogacy, aka other people's natural wombs.
Only for those who can easily afford daycare and other child-related costs would benefit from artificial wombs, the biological aspect and maternity leave are a small aspect.
The will-it-won’t-it collapse of the AMOC is something to keep an eye on. But there are other pressing climate change issues to address in the near term, such as food security, ecosystem degradation, and rising disease rates.
I think, as sad as it sounds, the exact number doesn’t really matter.
We know: We know: a government whose sole purpose is to protect its people has committed the mass murder of unarmed civilians. has committed the mass murder of unarmed civilians.
That’s all there is to know to make a judgement about what has happened.
If you want to have a philosophical discussion about whether that is really the "sole purpose of government", then I suppose we could have one, though frankly my interest in that isn't all that high.
That's a long way from asserting that it is, in fact, the sole purpose of government, which was what I objected to.
If I know what was going on transparently I am stressed. As an ordinary employee, I don’t need to know everything and therefore don’t need to worry about it.
As a leader, it's important to provide not just the meat but also the veggies. What people end up eating is up to them, but serve the full course! If as a ME, I start deciding who needs to know what, information will be perceived as incomplete because people always talk and engineer are often smart enough to read between the lines. So the transparent umbrella is a great analogy. Communicate bad news as fast and coherently as possible - group meeting with open questions works well for me but be ready to address the potential fears: "In my current assessment, that's not going to be a problem, I'll let you know if that changes." and of course "Thanks for asking, I didn't consider that and I don't know yet. I'll clarify" is a valid answer, if you do indeed clarify.
If you're genuinely stressed with that, talk to your lead about it and they'll find a way to filter a little more while not giving you the feeling of being left out.
I want to be aware of enough to be productive, yes, but not so much that I get bogged down in the minutiae of corporate politics and can’t focus on my daily work.
Yes. I don't want to know the politics either, but on at least one occasion, for me, it gave me a very good and correct indicator of when to jump ship and saved me a lot of uncertainty (i.e. unemployment).
You're right, probably not everything! It's a managers job to understand what you don't need to know or worry about. But I find it very useful to understand why something is happening, or what else is happening out there that might have an impact on us and we should worry about.
I use this same username everywhere and it's tied to my identity so let me keep it brief. I live in a small town and you wouldn't get much protesting or any political activity in those.
On the other hand, I'm currently serving in the police force (Which all able bodied men of age have to do and serve in one of the three armed forces of my country) and the bigger question since the start of the protests has been "What to do if I was put in a position against people?"
Thankfully that hasn't happened yet but still there is a feeling of being stuck between a rock and a hard place.
Logged in just to say, 100% with the other person's comment for you to make a new username... why even risk having something so personally identifiable on the internet especially in the country you live in. I don't and I live in the United States...
There are a lot of words one could use to describe the Israeli pager attack on Hezbollah, but indiscriminate isn’t one that leaps to mind, particular when compared against other contemporary military strikes
Comparing the lack of humanity of military strikes surely is a slippery slope.
Let me remind you that many civilians died, including two children. Don't take my word for it:
The following quote can be attributed to Lama Fakih, Middle East and North Africa Director at Human Rights Watch:
“Customary international humanitarian law prohibits the use of booby traps – objects that civilians are likely to be attracted to or are associated with normal civilian daily use – precisely to avoid putting civilians at grave risk and produce the devastating scenes that continue to unfold across Lebanon today. The use of an explosive device whose exact location could not be reliably known would be unlawfully indiscriminate, using a means of attack that could not be directed at a specific military target and as a result would strike military targets and civilians without distinction. A prompt and impartial investigation into the attacks should be urgently conducted.”
The affected equipment was C2 infrastructure and distributed by Hezbollah itself to its members for use in conducting military operations. Again, if you’re familiar with the use of military force today or really any military history since the invention of artillery, a handful of civilian deaths from an attack on several thousand combatants, while always tragic, does not represent an indiscriminate use of force.
Tim Maudlin - On the Methodology of Actual Physics
Physicists and philosophers often allow themselves the luxury of contemplating the methodology of a sort of idealized physicist. One such tempting model of how physicists make predictions is provided by Laplace's (or more accurately Bošković's) demon: the complete physical state of the universe at a moment is fed into some fundamental dynamical equation and then one calculates what will-or might-happen. Of course, everyone knows that this is an idealization. The requisite initial condition cannot, in fact, be known. And even if it were, the calculation could not be done. So arriving at actual predictions must involve idealizations and simplifications. But the extent and nature of those idealizations and simplifications has not, I think, been properly acknowledged, especially in the context of quantum-mechanical predictions.
I will consider the problem at a somewhat abstract level, and then make specific remarks about predictions of arrival-place and arrival-time predictions that are based in quantum theory. There, the conceptual foundations of the predictive methods are more shaky and contestable than is generally recognized.
AFAIK, one technique for monitoring cracks uses ultrasonic sensors. They send sound waves through the rails and detect cracks by analyzing reflected waves.
"How dare you asking me when I will have children?"
It’s also not necessary to have kids for retirement anymore.
Look at the top 3 countries with the highest fertility rates over the last 10 years:
- Chad - Somalia - DR Congo
Outside of Africa it’s Afghanistan and Yemen.
reply