For me, self-accountability isn't about shame. It's realizing that in my better & stronger moments, I identified my goals and what I wanted to accomplish. So now, when it's time to execute (and I'm perhaps in a weaker moment), I trust the previous version of myself and follow my original plan.
Same. I have friends from some gigs that have stayed friends for many years. Other jobs, I never talked with anyone again. Age and stage of life is factor. If your coworkers all have young children, birthday clubbing isn’t really on their agenda.
Without out-of-work activities & bounding, friendly coworkers don’t transition into friends. I’d suspect remote work makes it very difficult to form a permanent friendship with a colleague.
Definitely agree age and stage of life is a factor. Which makes me more surprised how I've become so friendly with people at my current company. Our age ranges from early 20s to late 50s, singles, married with kids, etc. Most of us don't even live too close by. The only distinguishing factor I can think of, is as I mentioned, my ex-boss, who really had a knack for bringing people together.
HR can be very useful and has helped me on multiple occasions, so the advice I often see that HR isn’t your friend might be a little reductive. Perhaps the advice should be that HR is not your friend during a dispute with your organization?
What it is, is that HR exists to serve the company. Helping you onboard, get your basic finances straight, resolving conflicts, etc, ultimately serves the company (or is neutral to the company, so free to be executed under moral/friendly obligation without repercussion) — a happy employee is a working employee (and resources suddenly quitting in anger is not good for anyone).
So they help employees, but it’s to a large degree self-serving (even if the HR person himself does not realize it — it’s why he doesn’t get in trouble for wasting time on it). But when it becomes actively detrimental to the company, always assume HR will make the decision in favor of the company.
Treating HR as generally hostile is also a bad idea — the assumption of hostility is often met with the same, and now both you and HR are acting slowly, carefully and inefficiently — but never assume they’ll always be your friends. They’re generally friendly, and they may even be considered friends, but ultimately their loyalty is not to you.
The same is true of really anyone in the company — your boss, your coworkers, your attorneys, etc. Their loyalties are always to themselves, and their families first (by which job preservation is a very strong incentive), and maybe you fall in line somewhere.
Yes, but then I never expected someone in HR to fall on the sword on my behalf and risk their livelihood because I’ve picked a fight with the boss. Perhaps others did?
I think we agree on the role played by HR. You need to be aware they serve the organization first (as do we all). I just wanted to point out that in the day-to-day, they often provide real benefits to employees, which may be self-serving but there’s no rule that self-serving behavior can’t be mutually beneficial.
I think it can be extended, anyone being paid by your employer is working for your employer and not for you (I guess unless you are the CEO or something). Expecting them to be even neutral is a mistake. They will do what they believe is best for the company.
And to be honest I don't see myself doing anything different than that as well. It's going to be very unlikely I am picking a fight with my employer whatever you are coming to me with.
You’d have to take into consideration Federal lands within states where federal laws apply: National Parks, military installations, and other Federal buildings like courthouses.
In your defense, I'd say reading is put on a pedestal by our culture. Most would consider reading a book a more useful time investment than watching television, but I think it depends greatly on what book (trashy novel) and what television show (documentary).
As a reader (LOL) I find it to be a strong negative signal when someone identifies prominently as a reader, puts that in their Twitter bio, wears T-shirts or caries tote bags with reading-related slogans, et c. For some reason it usually turns out that they almost exclusively read young adult, trashy genre fiction, thrillers, romance novels, that kind of thing. Which is fine! I read garbage sometimes too! It's fun! But people who watch reality TV, 24-hour news, and Lifetime movies, don't wear shirts with... hold on, let me find some of these reader t-shirts with an image search:
"Obsessive TV-Watching Disorder" or "TV watchers gonna TV watch" or "Eat Sleep TV-Watch" or "Never underestimate the power of a girl with a TV"
Not sure why things are that way, but I'd go out of my way not to broadcast a "reader" identity, for this reason.
Thanks! I am talking more about courses online that are specifically designed to educate.
I think most books are 90% of business/self help is filled with stuff to make them a saleable book. Fluff. No one will pay $10-$50 for a 3 page PDF. But I prefer the 3 page PDF. Ironically often information in that format is free!
Seeing a psychologist > self help book. Making money on a side hussle > reading 0 to 1. Doing a course on freecodecamp > buying a coding textbook. Etc.
Books can be great but there has to be a big reason to commit to reading 300 pages. History books I will accept for example.
Many self-help books start as articles then are expanded into book-length pieces with fluff. You’re correct, but I suspect you got the downvotes because you said “books” without qualification. As you note, self-help != history.
If I’m interpreting correctly, you’re asserting that doing things is better than reading about them, which I agree with. But I can buy a coding book and do all the exercises, sample problems, and create projects for myself based on the material and potentially get more from it than someone doing a course. Especially if they aren’t terribly engaged.
Or to put it another way: “You wasted $150,000 on an education you coulda got for $1.50 in late fees at the public library.”
Since you mention domain issues, I’ll also note that all the examples given are tracking system events, not domain events. For domain events, a system timestamp is usually incorrect.
The date something occurs in the real-world can be different from when the data entry was done. If you blindly convert Booleans into timestamps without that differentiation, you’ll end up with misleading data.
