• 3 Posts
  • 171 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 10th, 2023

help-circle

  • There’s better answers here addressing the unlikeliness of contract killers existing in the sense of a freelancer available for hire to all the general public rather than someone trusted by peers in a criminal enterprise and also about the “contract” not really being a contract because it’s unenforceable but I think you could also draw the conclusion just by reasoning alone that if a contract killer in that Hollywood sense of the term existed, and breached their contract and you the client don’t have the personal connections or power to threaten that particular assassin’s life in response, there’s always just good old reputation at stake. I mean, it wouldn’t help you in your specific case if they’ve nicked off with the money and left your target very much alive but to have hired them in the first place would have required word of mouth in hopefully a pretty small community of people since you can’t exactly expect to find them on fiverr so you could make it know pretty quickly that this person doesn’t honour their contracts so their wet work career would be over pretty quick.




  • It also sounds like based on the preceding post that they really are going to have to do this as the initial reaction to offending their coworker seems not to have gone down well with them and their colleagues at all. It looks like they’re kind of having to do this to prevent things escalating any further which might be why their apology has needed to be workshopped and people are finding flaws in it. They’re probably having to work through a fair bit of resentment before they can find an authentic apology in themselves. Good for them though, that can take a bit of reflection and the initial instinct can be to try and issue a non-apology apology but instead they’re working through it to get it right.


  • A lot of the response here has been around the way the ‘apology’ focusses too much on the person who’s supposed to be receiving the apology and not the person who has something to apologise for. The intended draft follows along the classic lines of “sorry if you feel that way” which implies that the person being apologized to is really the one in the wrong for having taken offence and the apologizer is just indignant at being forced to say anything rather than actually sorry for anything.

    I get all that, but… Is there no way to sincerely express being sorry for not considering or anticipating another person’s individual response to something as opposed to the thing itself? Without seemingly blaming them for that response? It’s still about the apologiser’s actions in having been inconsiderate in their deployment of language then, just not for the actual language. I ask because your proposed change “I’m going to work on improving my language” implies that the error was in using the word fuck at all and that their language is in general faulty in some way. I don’t think that’s the case. Having a manner of speech that includes that word is not something inherently bad, the bad behaviour necessitating an apology as I see it is for being too presumptive in assuming this particular person would have no problem with it when it’s known that some people might and also for not immediately taking that person’s offence seriously in the immediate aftermath when they expressed having taken offence (they didn’t take it seriously, this is a follow up post).

    It seems reasonable, if expressed very carefully, to commit to avoiding the word around them, since that’s all that person can reasonably want, that’s the problematic behaviour that is getting in the way of their working together. Committing to improving their language can really only mean committing to not saying that word generally which is defacto suggesting the word itself, not the lack of consideration is the problem and also puts OP in a position now of being on the hook in future not just for using the word around this individual but in all other circumstances as well something they shouldn’t promise. If the work environment is such that nobody else speaks like this and they’re the only one then sure, it should have been common sense to begin with and such a commitment is a no brainer, but if it’s otherwise common practice and it’s just this one person they need to accommodate then that’s what should be done, accommodating this one specific person in order not to offend in future and apologising in order to let them know that you hear them and consider their feelings important.


  • I can’t foresee Lemmy specifically reaching levels of popularity comparable to platforms like Twitter or Reddit. Barring some very strange disastrous upheaval of the whole landscape they and their ilk will continue to be Leviathans even with decisions at the top that look like outright sabotage. There is so much inertia. Maybe those two examples might disappear, but only if they’re devoured by another just like them.

    I can see Lemmy and similar Federated platforms with their quite sizeable yet comparatively miniscule user bases carrying on as they are and even growing a little bit and having some effect on the zeitgeist with the occasional piece of local culture seeping in to the wider platforms though people there will likely not know that’s where it came from. I also think efforts like Threads or likely something similar that comes after will be where the fediverse meets any mainstream success essentially becoming part of those bigger platforms in some way I can’t yet predict in detail.

    The big appeal of Lemmy is ideological and technical, this will always limit the number of people drawn to it. If there weren’t already giants in this space that wouldn’t matter because there’d be a snowball effect that would draw crowds who came because of other people not because of any interest in how the platform functions or ideals to pursue and with those crowds could come more crowds until you have a critical mass. But with the situation as it is now, the big crowds that draw yet more crowds still, are elsewhere so you’ll only ever have enthusiasts or ideologues that go out of their way to be here.





  • I care, usually not very much, but somewhere above zero. It’s good that they actually have something to talk about which therefore gives us something to talk about. Holidays overseas are a bit easier than kids because there’s some relatability there but whatever they’re talking about it’s usually more the person talking about it that’s interesting more than the thing. You’re already friends, so you already enjoy their insights or way of talking about things and you’ve probably been there for a fair few of their important life events so it’s nice to hear about the latest ones and how that’s shaping then today as others shaped them before.

    Because I don’t have kids and wasn’t on their vacation for me there is a natural limit imposed on just how interesting it can be hence saying I don’t exactly care a whole lot, but it’s usually at least enough to make sharing a beer more satisfying.






  • I guess if, as this person says, the intended use is made clear then presumably so long as the original logs from which the report was generated are retained then there shouldn’t really be an issue. Make your nice, digestible reports that normalise over a workday and give a more grand overview of progress, and if they smell a bit too rosy or you just sometimes need a more granular accounting of time then clients/bosses can request the original raw data from the contractor/employee. Maybe this software itself should include some ability to retain a log of the processing that was done so that the relationship between its generated reports and the source data can be more clearly audited if some kind of a trust issue arises.

    The hope I guess would be that you make it clear that this is a more executive summary style of report that you’ve added as a courtesy because it’s more useful in context and that’s hopefully enough for whoever you’re reporting to but if they want more transparency or detail it’s all there for them too.





  • Further to that third point as well, there’s probably also a question simply of opportunity. You could take the Munich situation as evidence of capability, but it may also have been opportunity plus capability. Intelligence seems like it’s a pretty difficult game and perhaps the successes in operation bayonet had to do with fortunate and unlikely intelligence scoops that they have not luckedh upon this time around and can’t rely upon as a strategy. Also, while I don’t know much about the post-Munich assassinations, it sounds like they went on for over twenty years, didn’t really take out many of the actually important, directly involved individuals and a lot of the people they would have logically wanted to target successfully went in to hiding out of their reach so if the strategic goal is to behead the organisation that carried out attacks as a defensive strategy to weaken their capacity to do it again, 20 years just to take out relatively minor unimportant figures isn’t really going to work.

    That said, it also looks, as many have stated, like “taking out Hamas” is more a convenient political smokescreen for a much more sinister goal so a very successful intelligence operation that rapidly took out all their leadership at once would actually run counter to their true objectives in this scenario.