> You say that, but it’s how most companies operate unfortunately.
Thank goodness you are incorrect.
Most people in business, like most people generally, are ethical human beings. Good to deal with, trust worthy and reliable.
That is my experience.
The sharks that rise to the top of billion dollar companies I only see in the news. My impression is that they are generally mentally disturbed (Elon Musk's "jokes" on Twitter about taking Tesla private is a case in point). But I hope that is a selection bias from the news cycle. Still waiting for the evidence....
Maybe "most companies" was the wrong choice of wording. How about "most large companies that actually influence the world?"
>Most people in business, like most people generally, are ethical human beings. Good to deal with, trust worthy and reliable.
It doesn't matter if the people you've anecdotally dealt with are ethical. It doesn't even matter if most of the people "in business" are ethical. The incentive structure to make the right choice for large public companies, or even venture-backed private ones just isn't there.
I wish I was incorrect, but I'm not. If I was, we wouldn't still have companies producing fossil fuels, animal agriculture, or surveillance capitalism.
$20 a year and acts as an ad-blocker too. NextDNS is another one. It's nice you don't need to install anything (other than configuring DNS). Using DNS for ad-blocking also avoids the "we noticed you're using an ad-blocker" popups.
I think the problem is not with threads themselves but with Slack's implementation. Threads provide a much-needed way of creating a discussion around a specific topic that doesn't pollute the main channel. In Slack they seem like more of an afterthought than a primary communication tool.
If we care about collateral damage done to animals due to plant farming, then we should still stop eating animals due to the efficiency loss in calories when converting plants to animal calories. 70% of soy is grown for animal feed, and so is something like 50% of corn. Don't tell me all cows just need to be grazing all the time. There just isn't enough land for that. Even assuming 100% of our calories aren't coming from meat.
The carnivore diet simply isn't sustainable. Suggesting that's something the entire human race should be doing is lunacy. I'd wager all these people who feel good on the carnivore diet feel that way because they've stopped consuming processed carbs and other garbage. Meanwhile that diet and keto are associated with increase in all-cause mortality.
You said "that diet and keto are associated with an increase in all-cause mortality" -- in fact, I believe the opposite to be the case. Check out The Big Fat Surprise by Nina Teicholz to learn more about nutrition science.
I would be inclined to believe thousands of proper scientific studies than a journalist lobbied by the meat and restaurant councils but that’s just me.
This is why I want to write my book called "The Carnivore Panacea" -- because there is so much disinformation out there on diet and many people are just slack-jawed when they hear that some study is associated with the Harvard School of Public Health.
Let me assure you that they should be slack-jawed, but not at the rigor of the publication, but at the fact that anything from such an ideologically driven vegan clown show would be considered worthy of publication.
>Those who choose not to get vaccinated are making a risk calculation; they are making a choice.
Yes, but that choice does not only impact them. Being disallowed the luxury of going to restaurants and bars could be seen as a form of payment for creating that externality.
I wish more companies thought like this in general. I often think about the nature of the work I'm doing as a developer and wonder if it's making society better off as a whole. The answer is usually a resounding no.
In my country, SW engineer is one of the best careers in terms of income, and I bet it is similar in most of the other countries. Why do we deserve that much buzz/fame/respect/income if the work we are doing is NOT making the society better?
> Why do we deserve that much buzz/fame/respect/income if the work we are doing is NOT making the society better?
I understand that you're asking a theoretical question, not a practical one, but in practical terms the answer is fairly simple. Our economy is not built to (indeed, is built not to) reward individuals in line with what they contribute to society. An entirely different set of incentives are what structure our economy, and therefore the jobs and lives of most people.
In some sense, David Graeber's Bullshit Jobs is all about the widespread awareness (and denial) of this phenomenon, and what caused it. I wouldn't say it's a perfect book but it's the best one I've read on the subject.
That's obvious. It's a work that by definition reach many others automatically and acts faster than humans, with less human intervention so it saves work. Anything that saves time/money and has this multiplication effect will generate tons of cash. No wonder we catch a part of it.
Edit: in other simpler words, it's useful and scales fine.
They could think like this if it became part of their cost structure. There's no reason for them to think like this other than in terms of profit & loss.
