the story was about an experiment that was done to test the effects of these same three personality types on a working environment (although they called the flake the slacker, and the heretic was a bit different ,as the depressive)
To do this they repeatedly inserted an actor who would display one of these behaviors into a working group and study the outcome - and groups with any kind of disruptive co worker ended up doing considerably worse on their projects. Also interesting, the other members of the group took on the traits of the actor... When he was acting a jerk, the others in the group became rude not only to the jerk but to each other. When he was the slacker, everyone else started slacking more also. And when he was the depressive everyone else became more depressed.
The only time the actor did not effect the groups performance was in one team where a particularly charismatic member was able to diffuse all situations where he was being a jerk.
In the arts, like in any field, you only get better by immersing yourself in it and it's hard to do that when you have to treat it like a hobby rather than a job.
Ask yourself what level of talent you would have right now if there was zero money in coding or designing software, and you just did it on evenings and weekends, when you were not working your full time job in retail or food services to scrape by?
There is just something disturbing to me about this idea that people should be suffering so that others can read better poetry on their comfy 100k tech salaries.
I've heard this theory again and again and as someone who works in a (non-tech) industry where it is the norm for people at the bottom to work very hard for very little,while the bosses travel the world and live in huge beautiful homes, this does NOT seem to be the case in reality. Myself and my colleagues find it hard not to become bitter about it and to stay motivated to work hard. I only graduated 6 months ago but about half of my class has already become so discouraged by this system that they are thinking about - or already have- switched careers.
On the other hand, in my previous job the boss paid us As much as he could afford to ($17/hr, not bad for retail) and in his life was by no means rich at all. He drives a beat up car and wears second hand clothing. We all respected him so much and felt much more motivated to do well, and also felt like we were an actual part of his company and took it personally how well the company was doing. In my position now, and my colleagues agree, we feel totally cut off from the company and have no interest in how well a collection does (I work in fashion.)
Basically I feel like this theory only works if the CEO is overpaid and the workers are fairly paid. But in the end I think feeling part of a team is better for the company than feeling like you are in a tournament.
I would also like to add that 90k is hardly embarrassingly low. That is quite a comfortable wage that many people will never see in their life.
This is so true. It would probably be safer to just leave it completely devoid of any human artefact and cross our fingers nobody goes there.
I can't really imagine any situation where our current civilization wouldn't go down there. A bunch of pictures of dying people and something buried in the earth? Sounds pretty tempting.
If the human race has persisted steadily enough over those 10000 years to have retained knoledge of our current languages, I doubt they would have let slide the knowledge of where the nuclear waste is buried.
I think the whole idea here is that a lot can happen in ten thousand years. Whoever is trying to go in there could be human or non human, could be advanced or primitive. Symbols are the best way to communicate in any of these events.
At the same time, you shouldn't confuse a regulatory system that gives corporations whatever they want with socialism. If there was no crtc, they would already be billing this way. It's a lot harder for a free market to curb monopolies in Canada, as we are a vast and comparatively sparsely populated country. I would imagine the cost of setting up an infrastructure across the country for so few users would not be viable for a small startup company. If it were not for the crtc, bell would never ever have shared their infrastructure with smaller companies and the free market would have delivered us a monopoly for sure.
It does, though. Faced with two options, one employee who is passionate about computers and has been playing with Photoshop since he was a kid, and one employee who took a "two week" course and obviously is just looking for a paycheck anywhere... Who would you chose?
I'm not American and could be mistaken but I was under the impression that this 99 weeks plan was a temporary extension because of the recession. The idea being that while many, many fields may not be hiring now, whe. The economy is up to speed enough to start showing sizable changes in unemployment rates, those jobs will come back. But they are thinking one year may not be enough time.
Am I mistaken? Is the 99 weeks permanent? not that that would be bad - Ive known many on welfare... It's hardly a fun times free ride. And I have known many who have needed more than two years, after honestly trying many different avenues.
That's a sad way to approach a career. Really, most industries are an "underpaid ghetto" by those terms, especially for women.
Wouldn't any person be better off "psychically" to do a job they enjoy and are driven to pursue? I don't feel like the same person who is passionate about coding would neccesairily be so passionate about marketing.
I should add also though that if she does mean pregnancy, she is wrong. I would say AIDS pretty much leveled the playing field as far as sexual risk goes. Definitely scarier than giving birth.
I don't think it needs to have anything to do with deadbeat dads or the possibility of raising a child alone. Pregnancy is and will always be different for the woman. For one, she has to actually be pregnant for nine months and deal with the sickness and pains that brings. Then she actually has to give birth. Getting pregnant when you are not ready is a terrifying and a loss of your life and plans as you know them.
Yes, when you have the baby you adjust and are happy for it and yes in the future you can pick up your career again and try to juggle both. But when you are not wanting a kid yet, it's hard to think about it that way.
And abortion is not exactly an enjoyable alternative either.
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/370/r... (it's the prologue if you want to listen)
the story was about an experiment that was done to test the effects of these same three personality types on a working environment (although they called the flake the slacker, and the heretic was a bit different ,as the depressive)
To do this they repeatedly inserted an actor who would display one of these behaviors into a working group and study the outcome - and groups with any kind of disruptive co worker ended up doing considerably worse on their projects. Also interesting, the other members of the group took on the traits of the actor... When he was acting a jerk, the others in the group became rude not only to the jerk but to each other. When he was the slacker, everyone else started slacking more also. And when he was the depressive everyone else became more depressed.
The only time the actor did not effect the groups performance was in one team where a particularly charismatic member was able to diffuse all situations where he was being a jerk.