Curse of knowledge applies here unfortunately, in that it was so long ago I can’t be a reliable source on how to learn now. I recall being recommended “never split the difference” at some point and reading it and finding it useful (again, so long ago I can’t remember what’s actually in the book now).
I’d also try to hunt down a peer or someone just slightly more senior than you who you suspect is better at this than you and ask them for advice. Consider treating it a little bit like a behavioural job interview though. Questions like “so for your last promotion cycle, when did you start the conversation with your boss? What did you present to them? What format/medium? How often? What was the result? What did you expect? Did you have a Plan B? How often are you exploring other options just in case?” not so much “what would you do in this situation?”. If they’re successful you’ve more to learn from what is actually working from them rather than their hypothetical ideal.
It's different in that you'll probably look at more than one source if you're searching the web. The sites with bad info become pretty obvious when you've looked at more than a few different sites on the topic.
Right. Depending on the take, your aligns with the utilitarian perspective as well. You don't need to make everyone happy, as long as it leads to the "greatest good" (rule utilitarianism) or the "highest average happiness" (average utilitarianism). My point is that this perspective is not devoid of philosophical problems.
I do wonder if developers would accept the same from people they "employ" to do a task.
I imagine sometimes I renovate my kitchen, an expensive task, within my budget but with not a lot of leeway, I can't renovate the kitchen twice for example. If the workers say they don't know how long it will cost and they won't provide an estimate to when ... I would not be happy.
Even creatives, writers, musicians, graphic artists have deadlines and must estimate their work.
But we feel that our work is special and should not be asked to give an estimate.
I think the problem was in the gateway to USD. If they only accepted crypto, and paid it out to the sex workers, then it would work. But in the real world your average John has a credit card, not crypto, and your average sex workers can't pay their rent or buy groceries using crypto. The problem was, and always is, the gateways to fiat. And I don't see a solution to that.
There's is no user-friendly solution, but I don't see why it would not be possible to send money to/from a -say- Kraken wallet to a wallet used to buy/sell sexual services from an app. It's just a bit of hassle to transfer.
Not including the on-ramp from fiat to crypto inside the app would solve the issue, I would think.
It made me realize there are ways for capitalism to be “ethical”, that not all banks are trying to make a profit at all costs and that there are investors that track and optimize for other metrics besides monetary returns, e. g., community impact.
Community impact is certainly one angle to consider capitalism from, but for me the most important and damning aspect is the investor-ownership of the means of production. I think the people doing the work should be the ones getting the profits for said work. I don't think it's right for anyone to claim ownership of another person's work. It's inherently antagonistic to have parasites built into the economy.
There was a moment where a russian sub was depth charged by us destroyers. The subs captain decided that ww3 has started and ordered a nuclear torpedo to be fired.
On board they also had a higher ranking officer which overruled it. That was a close call.
The Ukraine war is messier, more urgent and has a lot more Russian corpses than the Cuban missile crisis. They are seeing US weapons everywhere, and there were some convincing stories that the Russian chain of command was being specifically targeted using NATO intelligence.
I'd work on the assumption that something like that will happen or has already happened and it isn't public knowledge yet. At this stage of the Cuban missile crisis people didn't realise how bad the situation was, so we probably don't have the full picture on the Ukraine war either.
That is the value in a proxy war- you don’t have the direct confrontation of US vs Russian fighters/ships, so the Ukrainian situation is ‘safer.’ All those dead Russian conscripts still isn’t as dire a situation as a US war vessel directly attacking a Russian sub.
The proxy war might be closer to Moscow than St Petersburg is. I don't think the Russians are fooled - the US just allocated more money than most countries GDP to this war, they may as well be directly at war. It isn't even a proxy war, the Russian army are suffering direct losses. Multiple Russian generals are dead [0]. Labelling it a proxy law is basically rules-lawyering in a way that is totally useless in the middle of an active war, the Russians are not going to react to this like it is some fight in the Afghan hinterlands or Somalia or something.
And this is in no way 'safer'. That is almost literally saying a Russian proxy war in Canada or Mexico would be less threatening to the US than a Russian missile base in Cuba. It is quite possible that when the dust settles we discover there was a 3:2 conversation where if it had been 2:3 humanity would be going extinct right now.
I'm not sure how people expect this war to end, but Ukraine being nuked is still an option if it goes badly enough for the Russian army. Unlikely, but war has a habit of becoming uncontrolled when the situation keeps escalating.
