This is a topic that my union recently addressed, because it turns out that most companies do not have a policy on how to handle sorrow, and this often results in a less than ideal situation for both the employee, employer and coworkers.

Sorrow is comparable to and often leads to stress. Having all the coworkers individually send flowers, showing secondhand sympathy, acting weird about it and themselves having to tell the story over and over does not help on the stress. It might even affect other coworkers too, who might have experienced losses too, triggering their issues over and over again. The result is that the entire work place is in a state of sorrow where they either tip toe around the topic or constantly brings it up. This is very unlikely to be what the person needs. It’s very different what kind of attention each person wants. Some people like to keep working as usual, using the work as a distraction or safe space from the mourning process all together. In a situation like this, it is nice to know that they are needed. Removing their workload could be a bears favour. Nobody wants get told that someone else did your job. It’s basically giving them either an existential threat or a burden of bad consciousness, because then who has to do those tasks and for how long.

All of this shows that even the best intentions can easily lead to more sick days or resignations throughout the entire company if the sorrow of one person is mismanaged. The right way is for the company to have a guideline or politic on who does what. The management must take the dialogue of which tasks can or should be handed over in what time frame, who informs the other employees of the death, the distribution of work, and on behalf of the individual: how they want to be treated on their work place.

Leaving it up to everyone is a recipe for disaster.

In your case, in short: At least make an effort to coordinate any gifts with the rest of your coworkers, so that the person in sorrow does not have to address you all individually and to avoid any other coworkers being left out or creating social groupings etc.

Definitely. I don’t disagree with the statement, I just think it’s poor judgement to praise the assassin, who might be a random scumbag murdering people for money, just like the CEO.

It wasn’t a hired hit. This was a statement.

Hitmen can be hired to make statements.

He might’ve started a movement.

I really dislike the hero worship going on. For all we know, that particular dude might be a paid hitman.

He’s not getting caught. The whole thing was obviously planned well. Never mind the professional technique and all that gun stuff, no, just consider the fact that he knew where and when to do it. How the hell did he track down the whereabouts of some relatively unknown CEO on a public street? That shows that the attack was carefully planned and of course any good plan includes an escape.

church organ donation.

I’m thinking worldwide. George Bush paved the way for a lot of populistic right wing politicians in other countries, showing that reckless incompetence is fine as long as you put on a suit and pretend to know something about economy.

He then dragged the entire ensemble of headnodding clowns into a war in Iraq on a false premise. Yes, Saddam was an asshole and needed to go, but he did not have chemical weapons. The entire war was about taking full control of oil, that Bush’s croonies had planned long beforehand.

Then there was a little financial crisis called “the great recession” in 2007 and onwards, and of course history has a tendency to point backwards, but I think it’s fair to say that the complete lack of oversight of the financial institutions was the main cause. The cause of this crisis was G. Bush Junior and all the other conservative government leaders in suits claiming to be “fiscally responsible”. If only they had been “financially conservative” that would’ve better, but they didn’t even attempt. It was pretty much as irresponsible as it gets.

I don’t think Trump or the USA as a whole can litteraly destroy the environment, because they’re not that many, 300m people of 8 billion worldwide, and I also don’t think Trump will initiate any wars directly, but they’ll do nothing to stop the existing wars, and we will see a worldwide financial crisis as soon as the next budget doesn’t get approved or earlier.

This election has the same dreadful feeling as 2000.

Nevermind the crazyness, it’s the certainty that something worldwide bad is going to happen due to the incompetence of the American government.

Maybe Biden could pack the Supreme Court before leaving office.

It wouldn’t be a great idea in the long run, but it’d potentially stop the entire system from functioning right now.

It can happen in many ways. If you’ve ever used your mail for anything, then the address is out there.

Just the other day I got an email addressed to 50+ people with every email in the “to” field. Ironically the mail was about online security…

Obviously it’s a breach on GDPR, but the damage is already done. If just one of the other recipients has been hacked or has forwarded to someone who is or has allowed some dodgy app to syncronize contracts, the scamners now has all the emails.

There’s absolutely nothing I could have done to prevent it.

If my phone didn’t have a cap, I’d hotspot it all, which is basically the idea of cellular home internet routers. I found a home router without a cap, which time will tell to be true, but it’s still more expensive than my phone with a very large but not unlimited cap.

They want to get paid, that’s the reasoning. The amount of data is really irrelevant except for pricing.

Roaming fees used to be the same until EU stepped in. Hopefully EU will eventually step in and order a full stop to ALL CAPS too. We live in the “future” now, right? Bring me my free unlimited connection so I can download that car they talked about.

It’s probably a law. Mandatory minimum breaks make perfect sense for factory workers.

Well I mean, I am interested in knowing the things I ask. It’s not just politeness.

Vacations are expensive. I appreciate any first hand information on places that I might potentially go to.

I already have kids, so my interest is mainly in sharing my own experiences to anyone willing to listen.

It gets easier to ask relevant questions when you have some experience in those things.

Regarding vacations, I like to ask about the nature of sights in the area. I’m not interested in what food was in the buffet or how many pools were at the hotel, but I would like to know if the area has anything of interest.

For people having babies, I like to ask questions about how they’re going to handle it, just to check if they are on top of the situation or if they need help with anything.

Yes. It’s down right scary to think about what the consequences of private ownership will mean.

In best case it will turn into a profitable business which means burning a shit ton of fuel in the atmosphere and leaving tons of garbage in orbit.

Yes it’s impressive that it’s possible, but is it less impressive if it means screwing up the option for others to launch anything in 50 years just because the richest man on earth right now wanted to earn more money.

It’s a small step for a large corporation, but it’s a large step backwards for humanity.

I’d rather see new technologies like the slingshot launches becoming successful than seeing SpaceX launching the same old dirty rockets over and over for profit.

“uu” ends on a down stroke. W ends on an upstroke, just like the difference between u and v.

You’re right. OPs second question is more specifically about vision, while I answered more broadly.

Anyway, comparing it to data from a camera is not really possible.

Analoge vs. digital and so, but also in the way that we experience it.

The minds interpretation of vision is developed after birth. It takes several weeks before an infant can recognise anything and use the eyes for any purpose. Infants are probably blissfully experiencing meaningless raw sensory inputs before that. All the pattern recognition that is used to focus on things are learned features and so also dependent on actually learning them.

I can’t find the source for this story, but allegedly there was this missionary in Africa who came across a tribe who lived in the jungle and was used to being surrounded by dense forest their entire life. He took some of them to the savannah and showed them the open view. They then tried to grab the animals that were grassing miles away. They didn’t develop a sense of perspective for things in longer distance, because they’d never experienced it.

I don’t know if it’s true, but it makes a point. Some people are better at spotting things in motion or telling colours apart etc. than others. It matters how we use vision. Even in the moment. If I ask you to count all the red things in a room, you’ll see more red things that you were generally aware of. So the focus is not just the 6° angle or whatever. It’s what your brain is recognising for the pattern at mind.

So the idea of quantifying vision to megapixels and framerate is kind of useless in understanding both vision and the brain. It’s connected.

Same with sound. Some people have proved being able to use echo localisation similar to bats. You could test their vision blindfolded and they’d still make their way through a labyrinth or whatever.

Testing senses is difficult because the brain tends to compensate in that way. It’d need to be a very precise testing method to make any kind of quantisation for a particular sense.

They definitely do show sympathy, sadness, fear and joy, which are unrelated to being rewarded with food and trained behaviour.

I don’t see why they shouldn’t have a full range of emotions. It seems simpler and more natural than developing a transactional response only.

The bigger question is what emotions even are. If it’s a chemical or biological reaction then it’d be weird if other mammals didn’t have about the same emotions as humans.

It’s difficult to see how an animal feels unless you know it well. I can mostly see how my own dog is doing, but I have no idea what mood a random dog on the street is in.

It is also possible to consciously alter the subconsciousness. For instance, by creating sensory input for yourself by saying things out loud to a mirror. Your ears will hear it, your eyes will see it, and your subconsciousness will then process it just the same as any other experience.

With enough repetition it will make a difference in which neurons are active whenever the brain comes to making a decision on that thing.

I don’t think it’s the brain but rather our consciousness that is limited. Our sensory inputs are always on and processed by the brain, but our consciousness is very picky and also slow.

People can sometimes recall true memories that they weren’t aware of, or react to things they didn’t think of and such.

Consciousness is also somehow lagging behind the actual decision making, but always presents itself as the cause of action.

Sort of like Windows telling you that you removed a USB stick 2 seconds after you did it and was well aware of it happening. Consciousness is like that, except it takes responsibility for it too…

When it encounters something that it didn’t predict, it’ll tell you that “yeah this happened and this is why you did that”. Quite often the explanation for doing something is made up after it happened.

This is a good thing mostly, because it allows you to react faster than having to consider your options consciousnessly. You do not need to or have time to make a conscious decision to dodge a dodgeball, but you’ll still think you did.