The new requirement is that the maximum weight of a clothed worker is 124.7kg or 274.9 lb.
One worker said he was at 118kg (260.1 lb), and his target weight is 110kg (242.5 lb).
Not to throw shade at anyone in particular, but using the USA NIH.gov BMI calculator, for a 5'-11" man, the "healthy" range of BMI is 18.5 to 24.9, in mass that is approximately 60.32kg (133 lb) to 80.7kg (178 lb).
Sounds like they are, actually. Especially because you used the word "average."
I've been in tech for decades, and coincidently I now have occasion to interact with oil rig workers. They're just normal people, maybe with a bit of an edge to them, which makes sense given the work. There are entire teams at $dayjob that I could swap out with an entire team from a rig, the only difference you'd notice is clothing.
They're also not super-ripped lumberjacks. They're not lifting heavy shit for hours a day. A good day for them is general upkeep where nothing goes wrong. Think things like: adjusting valves, inspecting equipment, welding things, inspecting things. Oil rigs are _massive_ and everything on them is massive. Humans aren't using their muscles nearly as much as machinery.
I saw that too. I'm 6'5", ~222lbs and NOT skinny, with more than a little excess flab. I imagine the # of people with a target weight over 240lbs is pretty small.
Your experience is one that the internet identified long ago under the moniker "special snowflake" as a derogatory. Derogatory because you are not special or unique even though someone conditioned you to think so.
That said, do you go so far as to accuse an entire generation of parents of conspiracy to brainwash their kids? Have you ever considered that the advice they gave was appropriate? For a while in the 80s and 90s, pretty much all white collar jobs had multiple specializations within each job, such that it made sense to expect your kid would need to find some unique niche.
Instead, the subsequent decades demonstrated that specialized knowledge was being centralized behind corporations, and corporations would use the same technology available to individuals to centralize even more. It's not hard to see the internet and global connectivity as disruptors of 'old' normality.
I guess the point is that the advice given to you was fresh but went stale fast due to the world changing.
Working with FoxPro, I'm assuming. I spent several years dealing with xBase systems, and it was honestly a nightmare. I suppose if you've never used any other language or database, you wouldn't notice. Plus, the bit relative to the OP, it's a mostly worthless skill.
It is increasingly trendy for grocery stores in America to have a "fancy cheese" section because the unit cost (eg dollar-per-ounce) of cheese makes it profitable. I'm guessing Europeans are paying high unit cost too, but don't mind because it's more socially engrained to seek out "quality" foods like fancy cheese.
In the USA, cheese is either a salad topping, a sandwich/burger topping, or a pizza topping, and not much else. I once bought some pecorino romano to make cacio-e-pepe and regret doing that, it's an overhyped dish.
I too had a boss in his 80s who was the patriarch of the company, he had one son who was a partner when I was there. By staying involved, he could live like gentry alongside his clients, going on interesting trips, and participating in interesting ventures, and being invited to many parties to mingle with the local high status. I don't think pouring his own nest egg into similar ventures would be the same. It was the difference between upper class rich and middle class rich.
His son developed his own upper-class tastes but had no interest in mingling business and pleasure. He had an interest in making international big game hunting trips frequently. Whereas the father's extracurriculars always involved the business, generating leads, etc.; his adult son's extracurriculars were just burning money as a demonstration of status.
Those are the two reasons why he would not step away.
That job was insightful but also depressing because I could recognize my own inadequacy. I want to go home after an 8 hour workday. Not a calendar of dinner with one city council member a week, a second dinner per week with a bank president or similar ilk, going to lunch with various other people, outings, parties, hearings, conferences, etc. It's both exhausting and anxiety-inducing cause of FOMO. I'm sure that's a third reason of why he would not step down.
I have a routine and the crazy part is that it is 100% effective, in that I can be restless, consciously start the routine, and 100% of the time I fall asleep. It is the oddest feeling to begin the routine, which requires conscious mental effort, and suddenly you can't remember anything because you fell asleep. I can only ever recall doing it at times when my mind is racing, so I can't say how well it works when calm as I forget to do the routine when calm.
The routine is basically a game to see if you can "flow" between mental images by envisioning scenes in your mind and then allowing some object in the scene to "pull" you into a different scene. For example, envision the power cable of your lamp, you fly along the power cable up to the light bulb, and then you envision the bulb glass exploding into a million pieces, which becomes snow falling on a ski lodge, you see the warm glow of fire in the fireplace, and a fireball blasts out the chimney into the sky, somehow becomes a perfect flaming sphere, that becomes a meatball and falls into a plate of spaghetti, you are eating it down, you see yourself at a ratty diner table, under the table you see your shoes, and then your shoes are running through rain puddles, you zoom into a single droplet which is actually a massive aquarium tank, fish are swimming in it except we are in the ocean, not a tank, and the fish is so colorful but those colors are actually an explosion of rainbow paint colors dripping down an apartment wall, etc. etc.
It might sound ridiculous when written in words, but that is the gist of it. The game is to lay there and consciously morph and fly between mental images, letting your mind conjure imagery that comes next.
It's crazy because I start doing this with a conscious struggle to envision the next chain-of-events but suddenly my brain catches on and starts unconsciously playing the game and images just kinda flow and BAM asleep.
When the detective says "I've got that (that = doorbell camera quality footage) on my phone right now of you taking that package."
This is clearly a police officer saying that she is a thief and felon. Isn't this slanderous/defamatory? The trial had not even occurred to prove guilt.
Does she have grounds to sue the police department for defamation?
> Does she have grounds to sue the police department for defamation?
No. Defamation is an injury to a person's reputation. For that injury to occur, a third party has to hear (and believe) the derogatory statement - if there's no one else to hear that statement, it's not defamatory.
She could spend thousands of dollars to sue the department for defamation, but she would have to prove without a shadow of a doubt "the speaker had a reckless disregard for the truth" when making the harmful statement, and then prove damages resulting directly from the statement.
The police department would then use her and her neighbors tax dollars to argue the officer followed procedure and did not intentionally lie with an intent to harm her reputation.
A jury would then determine if the police department fabricated the investigation or piece of evidence just so they could intentionally slander and ruin this woman's reputation.
Trump opponents might cringe at thinking about Trump as a leader, but it is the origin of his success. The L word is generally over-used and over-ascribed. For example, leadership might correlate with being a "hero" or being moral/just/fair,etc however there's lots of proof they don't correlate. It's a fallacy to think that a leader is also a hero. But some people do (fallaciously) ascribe these positive traits to leadership.
That said, in his domain, Trump leads; he generates the headlines and everyone else follows them.
Is JD Vance generating headlines? Barely. Is anyone else generating headlines? Lets consider a few:
- Tim Walz: mainstream media tries to meme Walz into being a headline generator, but he isn't, and poses no serious contention
- Mumar Gaddafi, Sadam Hussein, Hitler, Mussolini, etc: i'm not sure there has been a dictator that did not generate headlines.
- Steve Jobs: strong headline generator, such that he could have run for president and likely won
- pewdiepie: for a spell he was generating headlines, but mainstream media had no solid editorial narrative for the guy (and his hundreds of millions of followers) which posed a social risk. The more they discussed him, the more risk of society penduluming in some unpredictable way either by martyring him or amplifying his politics, so they chose the "ignore him and let whither" as a strategy which seemed to work, as he has drifted into Japan and been off-the-radar
- Luigi Mangione: a nonzero number of liberal voters would decry Trump in one breath and cast a vote for Mangione to be a politician despite evidence he is a cold-blooded murderer. This probably won't change much after conviction.
In conclusion, intelligent people are forced to lament the state of humanity in which leadership is game-ified so easily and yet so difficult to achieve. "How does one consistently generate headlines" is a difficult question to answer and seems to be one of the core essence of humanity. And, as described above, the origin of people's feelings of why a given person is successful.
Seeing some sort of van-life/starship-crew-cabin crossover would be interesting. But i'm not confident that your aspiration makes sense.
A lot of institutional knowledge is locked behind corporate walls. We can assume a crew cabin will be partly designed by engineers poached from other companies who can leak some of the institutional knowledge. That said, some of the crew cabin will be designed whole-cloth. At some point SpaceX will need to build it's own knowledge base. I would be curious to see how other components were built, i.e. the parachutes. A parachute has a lot of built-in institutional knowledge, and I'd be curious to see behind the curtains where SpaceX got that knowledge. You can't exactly check out a library book.
The concept of boutique engineering shops tackling chunks of the design is an interesting premise. But I don't see how the financials work. The more realistic scenario is that SpaceX will build it's own machine shops under it's umbrella.
Winnebago is churning out Ekko campervans at $250,000 and somebody is buying those. But you look at the quality of the interior, it's same as everyone else, lots of particle board. The point is, the most expensive campervans built by the corporate world are using cheap throwaway materials, not space age innovation. I shudder to think of the cost of what a space age campervan costs.
The Apollo program was at the unique juncture in history where distributed companies with institutional knowledge were rapidly maturing their products concurrently with NASA's demand. In today's world, you will not see the same number of companies spooling up assembly lines without massive costs.
>you will not see the same number of companies spooling up assembly lines without massive costs.
It's true, but I think this subject will scale throughout the entire survival category.
Cheap throwaway materials is one thing .. in situ 3D replication, another thing entirely.
The cottage industries can do a lot of the innovation. I think the sailboat/winnebago/portable-living engineering is going to come to a head, eventually .. and we will see new technologies, perhaps, springing up around the subject of human/biosphere construction.
If you're suggesting that we won't have winnebago's on Mars, I don't wanna go there.
The new requirement is that the maximum weight of a clothed worker is 124.7kg or 274.9 lb.
One worker said he was at 118kg (260.1 lb), and his target weight is 110kg (242.5 lb).
Not to throw shade at anyone in particular, but using the USA NIH.gov BMI calculator, for a 5'-11" man, the "healthy" range of BMI is 18.5 to 24.9, in mass that is approximately 60.32kg (133 lb) to 80.7kg (178 lb).