Hannan

I see; that sucks. I hope you get some answers and some financial/medical relief in the future.

I currently work 28 hours per week. This is the second time this has happened in my career. Both times the path was "be an FTE for a while at 40hr/wk, produce, wait for something bad to be suggested, quit, take contractor offer for same pay at reduced hours."

I don't imagine this works for companies with employees numbering over ~250 or so, so I've been very lucky.

You can hear about the experience of a POW, but it won't ever be the same as being a POW. Not trying to equate the two, just showing how telling/imagining aren't quite the same as experiencing.

Hey, thanks a ton. I'm only on the second video, and it already blows my mind how the man is even more the character than the character.

The project went several months over the proposed "schedule", which was inevitable, and I had told them as much.

The team was not asked to pull any overtime to complete it in the proposed time frame.

I took a 6 month sabbatical and then was asked to contract for them remotely as a developer (instead of manager) which I did for several years after that.

So, wins all around, I suppose.

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you here (nor have I ever been military in any remote respect), but there are some overlapping truths in that page, e.g. "Employ your command in accordance with its capabilities", under "Develop", points 1, 3, & 4.

I've resigned over unrealistic expectations from leadership about deadlines, and what was to be asked of my team to complete said deadlines. I would do it again. I'm sure I've had many many many failings as a manager, but I will not death-march any team under me with zero chance of success. There are several others in the GP's post. You are correct, they don't all apply and many may be harmful in a corporate environment, but that's why you get paid to separate the wheat from the chaff, right? :)

>> Oh, and curse you Americans for your ludicrous booze prices. A bottle of Lagavulin 16 here is $75.

I'll readily admit the heavier cost is easier to swallow given our petrol and electricity prices.

edit: petrol instead of gas

> If he lives another 60 years that is a bit more than $1.25M

Over $7 million if he can get 5% annually.

- Hill Climbing - Local Maximum - Gradient Descent

I don't pretend to have any sort of expertise in these sorts of discussions, so I thought I would throw out some easily wikipedia'd terms that seem to back your thoughts regarding convergence vs. exponentiation.

Yes, if all goods widely increased in cost (or at least, most). If it's only the goods that people buy in anticipation of (e.g.) a catastrophe, or goods that rely on those aforementioned goods to be manufactured and/or delivered, then the above comment is correct.