I wonder if he held the same utility function for the entirety of his life, because the beginning and end of his life is quite dismal. Not one bit of reflection in his life seemed to change his tone.
A recent observation, and this could be a biased one, you mentioned:
> we’ve spent a bit of time learning more about moving off the cloud to a managed data center. But the nice thing is not feeling like we need to.
That SaaS's are moving/thinking/completed to running their own infustructure away from managed services like digital ocean and aws, like 37Signal(Basecamp & Hey).
This is great. As someone who enjoys the aviation industry and needs something to listen to while I work, its nice to have two things to be used at the same time.
I think the key thing to question in your response is "sounds more like evidience ..." . How we intend to convey something is a byproduct of who we are at a particular moment in time, as is someone interpreting something is a byproduct of who they are at a particular moment in time. If you were to include gender to be one of the factors in the byproduct of who someone is at a particular moment in time, I would think my considered responses is more likely helpful then anything else unless their is something I'm not considering, because (1) you are acknowledging their hurt, and (2) you are conveying that was not your intentions. You can classify this scenario as a misunderstanding. People in general won't cohesively work well together until they recognize and change the way they handle these misunderstanding.
First off, you should be careful when using apologic statements at work. They can be seem as an admission of guilt by the claimant and/or employeer and can lead to further action. Saying things as such as:
(1) "I understand that you feel that way, but my intention behind that statement was ... ."
(2) "It's unfortunate that you feel that way, but my intentions were ... ."
(3) "I can see that my actions have affected you, by my intentions were ... ."
(4) "I didn't intend to upset you, my intentions were ... ."
would be better for issues in the future.
In regards to how she responded. You can't control how people interpret and handle situations. You can only change with how you deal with it in the future, knowing that she has responded this way should let you know that (
I would from now on keep all conversations in written and storable form via email, letter, or chat, and if you need to talk to her, make sure you plan what you are going to say and make sure you have another colleague in the room as a referense to the conversation.
If you feel you want to remedy to the situation, I would set up a meeting with HR and try and come to a solution.
Why are you deriving general statements from an article that are making specific claims about specific matters. ELA[1] as the CDC defines it, and as the article referenses back to, is "A (witnessed) traumatic event is a frightening, dangerous, or violent event that poses a threat to a (loved one)/child’s life or bodily integrity." There is no 'Depends on what particular "stress and adversity" from early life/ ELA.'
> From what we have learnt from Spirituality and all of the wise philosophers, that sounds contradictory.
Such a loaded statement. Coming from the assumption that there is anything reliable from spirituality or wise or unwise philosphers, doesn't mean that there reasons are justified truth belief, just anecdotal observations.
> Most of the teachings of philosophy point to adversity and stress as events from which we can learn from and become more stronger mentally
Can you please provide sources and not assume its common knowledge.
> It's possible that always being in this state of stress can morph your worldview to always be broken, and perhaps that is what's being referenced and reflected here.
"Possible," do you have any reasons to back up your claim?
"It’s well-established consensus that software is slower and more bloated than it was 20, 40 years ago." says it all. I see now why the suckless community makes the position they do.