I have to agree with the parent that on an intuitive level a single-sentence text message ending in a period conveys something pretty strongly. It does a couple things to me: indicating finality, turning an informal comment into a formalized sentence, and just feeling unnecessary thus prompting analysis. furthermore from a grammar perspective most messages are not proper sentences e.g. "yup" or "on my way". In the end we have to adapt our writing to the context, and texting has much more tonal analysis put on fewer symbols —
okay yeah, i see your point. I've only read The Fountainhead, which seemed in many regards to be pro "labour" and opposed to bureaucracy and corruption. so I'm not sure yet that rand was opposed to the purported function of unions or the manifestation of them. But indeed anarchy is completely out the window
The contrary in my experience, the extremely rich people I know spend their time e.g. saving the dying craft traditions of a small mexican village, or restoring thousands-of-years-old villas in the italian countryside. Seems to be incredibly satisfying for them, and really the work I would prefer to do.
It wouldn't be considered an insult from those many who liked the book, is my meaning. Just that the parent didn't seem to me to be especially insulting
I think inborn talent in a particular field is very real, and usually impresses people such that they can't help but say "you're talented". There is a separate quality that I would call industriousness, which determines whether a talented person will realize their potential, or whether an untalented person will develop the skill enough to make it anyways. Most of the people I have seen making it in the art world are actually industrious but untalented, and I would say we are far more likely to see this type of work everywhere we look. I think there's an ineffable spark I sometimes notice in a movie or whatever, and that's where a naturally talented – and – hardworking person got to make a dent. But yeah most works of art/film/music are mediocre due to having only the hardworking aspect.
I think there's something in between the polarity you've got there, something like "tough love". I think too much policy is based on emotional ideas, instead of seeing 'kindness, support, and re-integration' as ends of those ideal policies. People cannot just heroically decide to be kind in the face of an overwhelming issue.
I also think there's a point where things have slid so far that we need some measures that appear inhumane on the surface, but solve the problem more meaningfully. I think of the protesters in Toronto hoping to permanently protect the tent villages established in Trinity-Bellwoods inner city park, even blocking the police from clearing people out of their "homes". If we go on with policies like "give out free tents" that are the epitome of band-aid emotionally driven ideas It's hard to see how we aren't simply incentivizing the problem to grow.
It's as though some people genuinely think the permanent slums as in india or brazil are a solution and not a problem.
This will be my new go-to response when discussing microservices