literalbatshit

perhaps the player isn’t the important bit really. It’s the card manufacturer in fact. If I print a Nolan Ryan card no one cares. If a name brand does, and also promises to grow their brand and that will make it more valuable, maybe that is more closely related?

“Gaming” is not always equal to fraud though. We should expect legal gaming not outright fraud.

Can you share a transcript where it saved you an hour? I’m trying to better understand how I might apply it to my work.

So far it’s only been useful to me when working with a tool I don’t really know. But most of my work I know the tools fairly well.

I disagree. Plenty of folks incurred very high fines and even jail time over backdated options. People still backdate options. The risk is low enough, and the return is high enough, for people to creatively interpret the law. As long as there is an interpretation that could be valid, laws will be bent.

There are so many people that would happily take the risk for significant reward though. Like, make millions of dollars a year, 1% chance you go to prison? Lots of takers.

Wow, their description was awful. Yours is perfectly clear. Thanks!

The description of the crests lagging the troughs made no sense to me. I have no idea what is meant. Anyone have insight?

This article to a large extent exemplifies the popularization of a culture in which I am expected to understand and make accommodation for your needs and desires at all times, instead of you exercising your own agency and dealing with your own shit.

This culture then dresses up this mindset in loaded terms like “emotional labor” and “executive function theft” to make it more reasonable (and to make those that disagree look more unreasonable) but it’s all bullshit.

If you don’t want to send emails, find another job, or change your own job. If you don’t want to do the dishes, find another partner, or demand they change (and be prepared for them to leave instead).

But rather than this, the proponents of this culture demonize all those who disagree with them. Their arguments and approaches are intentionally not rational, and are instead emotional, precisely because they require everyone else to not engage with life and their own happiness rationally.