"The Body Shop plans to expand the practice to all of its retail stores this summer, where it employs around 800 people, and as many as 1,000 during the holidays."
Looks like they ran this as a pilot in the distribution center, and liked the results so much they're going to roll it out to retail.
If every single employer has the same work conditions, then what? If the state of the industry as a whole is low pay and unpaid overtime, then it's not like a developer can just go to a better job.
HN has a dislike of one-word answers without any hard data to back them up.
If fasting can be undertaken safely by an individual not in a health care setting, how? What is the mechanism for safety? What are some signs that fasting is veering towards unsafe- for that matter, what's unsafe fasting, anyway?
Applicant side: "What's the biggest struggle that you're currently working through?" coupled with "Tell me a bit about how you're working through that struggle."
I find this tells me a lot about the person who's interviewing me and the current climate they're operating in. Asking follow-up questions helps a lot here too. It's a good way to find out if the interviewer (frequently the hiring manager) is struggling with an unmotivated team, overly-onerous bureaucracy, lack of funding, staff turnover, outdated software, etc.
I used to struggle with this, but as I've gotten older I have realized that people generally like talking about things they're interested in, and you can keep conversation going by asking questions about what they like. It helps to have kind of a decent memory so you can pick up where you left off before.
So, for example, with your friends: "Hey, how's that [thing they were telling you about the last time you saw them] going?" then keep asking questions about it until the topic peters out. Also, a bit off topic, but if you're finding that you and your friends don't have a lot to talk about, maybe find new friends that share hobbies so you can have a more natural flow of conversation?
With other professionals: "How did you end up in [Profession]?" or "What brings you to [Conference, lecture, talk, etc.]" A good one that will get you a lot of interesting conversation is "What's your biggest challenge at work right now?"
On a date, just ask them about themselves. The whole point of a date is to get to know the other person better, so just ask questions. Maybe the conversation doesn't go anywhere, which is probably a good sign that the relationship isn't going to go anywhere.
Random casual encounters: "Hey, [Person]! What have you been up to lately? Oh wow, that sounds really cool! Did you [have a good time, enjoy yourself, meet new people, learn anything new, manage to get that problem fixed, etc]? Great! Well, I have to run, fantastic to see you again!"
With speaking one on one with other people, think of the conversation as branches on a tree. You have the main "trunk" of the conversation which is whatever you both have in common (for example, you're both attending the same professional conference), and then topics of conversations are branches of possibility (why they're at the conference, what interests them most about the conference, how they ended up in their profession, etc). You can follow a branch down further to more specific topics if the conversation seems to flow that way, or back up and try a different branch, or maybe following one topic of conversation will lead you in a different direction (They say they're at the conference because they just started a new job, so you start asking them about the job which leads to them saying they just moved, so you can start talking about where they moved from, etc).
Something else that has helped me a lot is really thinking about what kind of person I want to be perceived as, and then holding that intent as I interact with others. In my personal life, it's a bit easier, as I just want to be myself, but in my professional life, I have spent some time thinking about what kind of impression I want to leave people with. As a result, whenever I go into a professional situation (like a conference or a big meeting) I spend a couple minutes thinking about what kind of impression I want to leave. That will naturally affect how I interact with others, as I will actively work toward leaving that impression. I'm not saying I create a false persona, just that I try and intentionally have my interactions be positive (so I strive to avoid complaining), that I come across as receptive to what the other person is saying (so I focus on really listening to the other person and understanding what they are saying), and that the other person perceives me as trustworthy (so I don't spread gossip or speak maliciously about anyone else, and I keep conversations private on an ongoing basis).
Exactly! So if all Chihuly does is take a crayon to a piece of paper and say "Make this thing!", but your friend and others like your friend do the heavy lifting to bring the idea to life, is Chihuly that great of an artist after all?
Wow, that article led me to the artist Bob Kuster (http://bellemeadhotglass.com/gallery/glass-chandeliers/), "who's making chandeliers so closely related to Chihuly's that Chihuly frowned when he saw them in black-and-white, photocopied reproduction and asked, 'Are those mine?'"
That opens up another interesting thought process of which is more art, the chandeliers created by Chihuly's hired glassblowers directed by Chihuly himself, or the chandeliers inspired by Chihuly designs which are physically created by Kuster? What imbues a Chihuly design with "art"-ness? The fact that Chihuly signed off on it personally? The fact it was created in his studio and received his blessing?
Extremely well put. Part of the reason I wrote my original comment was to see what the HN collective thought about my reasoning- as I have personally struggled to think of Dale Chihuly as being an artist once I found out that he does not actually create the works that bear his name.
Likening him to a composer directing his own symphony makes a lot more sense- no one would argue that Mozart wasn't a great artist just because he couldn't play the whole symphony by himself.
Except Chihuly has not physically produced ANY of the glass sculptures attributed to him since 1979: "...he continued to blow glass until he dislocated his right shoulder in a 1979 bodysurfing accident. No longer able to hold the glass blowing pipe, he hired others to do the work."
It's an interesting thought experiment about what art actually IS: is art the idea behind the piece? Is it the skill that the individual has in physically bringing the piece to life? If the person with the vision doesn't physically produce the outcome, is it still their art?
It's pretty easy to sit back and say "No, of course not, if you only have the vision and don't do any of the work, then you don't get all of the credit!" And yet, think about how this translates over to the technology world. Whose name is associated with the iPhone? Steve Jobs. Did he, alone, design all aspects of the device? Perhaps. Did he code every chip, bevel every edge, sketch every wireframe? No. Did it come to fruition in a vacuum? Of course not, and yet very few of us can name any of the other individuals who collaborated with Jobs. Does Steve Jobs deserve credit for the invention? Of course, and he signed off on every design decision and charted the course for the device to come into existence. However, he was not an independent actor, but a spearheading collaborator with a very large team coming together to work on one project. And yet, Steve Jobs is the name we know.
So in that vein, is Dale Chihuly an artist? If he only designs the pieces (and from what I've seen, "designing" consists of vaguely sketching out colored shapes on large pieces of paper and then overseeing all of the glassblowers who make the various parts of his sculptures) but he never physically produces ANY of the sculptures attributed to his name, does he deserve all of the credit? If he oversees the whole process, start to finish, and has final say on every single aspect of the sculpture, should he be lauded for his vision even though it was not his effort that brought that vision to life?
With hot sauces, there's a very distinct flavor difference between Tabasco, Crystal, Frank's, etc. not to mention there's regional affiliation to what hot sauce you use.
Additionally, I think a lot of "traditional" recipes in the US which were passed down in families came from advertising in the 40s/50s/60s, so they specifically call for "Hellman's Mayonnaise" or "Toll House Chocolate Chips" or "Heinz 57" or whatever.
".....oversee discussion groups about anything from animal rights to sexual expression."
Why are there even discussions about this on a work forum? Why in the world would anyone want to talk about this stuff with the people they work with? Is it a side effect of the company being so large it's impossible to know everyone?
I go out of my way to not discuss anything that comes within a whiff of a controversial topic with the people I work with. I go to work to pull a paycheck and because I enjoy the work that I do, I do not go to work to make friends or to hang out with people. If I end up making friends with some of the people I work with, great, however, we hang out as friends outside of work and we don't discuss things as friends via any work channels. Is making your co-workers your friend group a new thing? Is it a side effect of working so many hours you don't have time to hang out with anyone else?
Right, so does that mean the post-surgery care that I was recommended is on the "extremely conservative" end and your doctor was more lax, or does that mean your doctor wasn't as well-read as others, or something else? Like the comment up-thread, how does one pick a good doctor for something like Lasik, which is seen as a minor medical procedure but is absolutely a major surgery?
"a reputable surgeon doesn't guarantee lack of side effects."
Absolutely! Side effects are possible for anyone getting the surgery, and like I said in my parent comment (or hoped to say), everyone should weigh the potential pros and cons to decide if the rewards outweigh the risks. For me, I already had terrible night vision (due to my astigmatism) and sensitivity to light, so after reading about potential side effects I determined to go forward with the surgery.
Also, I believe that advances in the LASIK procedure over the years have mitigated a lot of the side effect risks (though not reduced completely), so people getting the surgery today will have less side effects then you did getting the surgery 20 years ago.
Exactly the crux of the issue- I've only been to one doctor for getting my LASIK procedure, so I'm not sure what the best combination of data points would make a "good" doctor.
For me, I researched all of the doctors in my area, read reviews on many different review websites (specifically paying attention to people who had complications and what they said about the doctor's follow-up attitude), picked a couple of doctors who looked right for me, and then had consultations with each of them.
I also paid attention to which doctors didn't downplay the negatives of the surgery- because some doctors absolutely play up the "it'll be great and it's totally safe and nothing bad ever happens!" and some are way more realistic about it being a major surgery with a serious risk of complications.
I had LASIK a little over a year ago and it turned out very well for me, due in part to having a great doctor and due in large part to all of the research that I did before having the surgery. However, one thing I emphasize to everyone considering it is that (despite the marketing) it should be considered a major elective surgery with a possibility of serious complications, and that anyone considering it should weigh the pros and cons and do their own research before deciding.
Articles such as the one here tend to gloss over patient adherence to post-surgery self-care, which is one thing I believe makes or breaks successful LASIK (in my personal experience and from what I have read). This means eye drops on schedule round the clock, antibiotic eye drops on schedule round the clock, eye protection at night for the first week, avoiding dusty conditions for however long the doctor prescribes, avoiding getting water in the eye for however long the doctor prescribes, etc etc.
I also believe that thanks to a rise in LASIK's popularity and marketing some people do not see it as being "Major surgery being performed on your eyeballs, which you need in order to see". It seems to be talked about more like Botox or Invisalign or any other "lifestyle" type of procedure when in reality it's much more serious than that. Anyone considering the surgery should research carefully beforehand, weigh the pros and cons of the surgery for themselves, and compare multiple doctors before deciding to go ahead with the procedure, same as for any major surgery.
Again, due to its popularity, there are good doctors and then there are patient mills, and from my research pre-LASIK I believe that negative outcomes are greater when someone goes to a "patient mill" vs a good doctor, possibly because the doctor does a better job, or possibly because post-surgery instructions are emphasised more at a good doctor than at a patient mill.
Can't wash them in laundromats that don't allow them, and you have to have the money for the initial purchase plus the time to do the laundry. Plus you cannot use cloth diapers at daycare.
One of the things this article doesn't touch on is the very deep roots of hog farming in rural NC and the general prevailing attitude of "This is how we've always done it and I don't want no gubment telling me what I can and can't do with my land!" There is a sense of pride in being a hog farmer like your daddy and your granpappy and your uncle and you hope to pass down those roots to your sons some day. As to why there's a blind eye to the literal rivers of hog shit flowing into the creeks/rivers every time it floods, that I have no idea- I don't understand why people who live in that part of the state will cut their nose off to spite their face by accepting huge hog waste lagoons as a fact of life with hog farming. Being from NC I absolutely see Southern Stubbornness at work here.
Driving down the interstates in the eastern part of NC you see multiple billboards both pro- and anti-hog farming, with arguments ranging from "Hog farming keeps my children fed!" to "Hog farming is destroying our environment!" It reminds me of the pro- and anti-coal arguments currently underway in West Virginia.
Yeah, this is some serious political opinion masquerading as journalism:
Original Title: Why is liberal California the poverty capital of America?
With a permanent majority in the state Senate and the Assembly, a prolonged dominance in the executive branch and a weak opposition, California Democrats have long been free to indulge blue-state ideology while paying little or no political price. The state’s poverty problem is unlikely to improve while policymakers remain unwilling to unleash the engines of economic prosperity that drove California to its golden years.
The DC metro is absolutely NOT one of the best, for many reasons already explained by commenters. Many, many years of inadequate maintenance have caught up, to the point that this is a site that exists: https://ismetroonfire.com/
I live a half mile from a metro stop (out in the suburbs) and I STILL would rather drive into DC whenever I need to go into the city. It's faster, more reliable, and more convenient even with the hassle of driving in DC and finding/paying for parking.
Looks like they ran this as a pilot in the distribution center, and liked the results so much they're going to roll it out to retail.