> People from Sydney who move to London come to hate it, once the novelty wears off, just as they would with New York
Just sharing a different perspective, I'm from Sydney and have lived in all 3 and don't agree with this generalisation. I know plenty of Sydney-raised people who've lived in London or New York for decades, love those places, and don't plan to move back to Sydney any time soon if at all.
In this arrangement you don’t yet own the deferred compensation when you leave the company. It does not belong to you. Instead your contract with the company might say “we will set aside an amount of money (which isn’t yet yours) and portion it out to you for 1-2 years after you leave, conditional on you not joining a competing firm in that period. If you join a competing firm, we will stop paying you.” Alternatively, the company will just pay you your full salary (plus maybe a fraction of what you used to get in bonus) for this period.
Essentially you’re being paid an income not to work for the competition. Most people take this deal as it tends to be pretty good — think several hundred thousand dollars for you to take an extended holiday or work on personal projects.
If you do take a competing offer during the non-compete period, the company might also use legal action against you, which is another story entirely and one whose threat most people would prefer to avoid.
What a bizarre take. Who do you work with? The majority of people I’ve worked with of all ages at various companies default to all-lowercase in casual communication, including some of the most intelligent and expressive people. As the other commenter said, it’s perceived as friendlier and more casual. Messages with capitalisation and completely correct grammar in these settings comes off as stilted and corporate.
They're really not though, because they render differently on different devices. If I send a gun emoji, it may render as a squirt gun for you for instance. Very different meanings.
Also the way I feel about certain emojis is different from how you feel about them and thus carry different (if slightly) meaning.
For example, I pretty much never use the clown emoji as I find it personally offensive. But I'm sure that pretty much everyone else doesn't feel the same about it.
As other commenters have said, this could be burnout. In my personal experience, improving from burnout requires two things: an extended break from anything mentally demanding (preferably more than a month, but at least a few weeks), and a change in circumstances when you return (whether it’s a different team, different job, different project, etc). Both are necessary. If you just take a holiday without changing up your work, then you’ll spend the whole time dreading returning to the usual grind. It’s important to have something different to look forward to when you return. While you’re away, you can think about your work and whether you genuinely find it rewarding.
A lot of people go through this. I’ve been through it twice, and both times it felt like it hijacked my brain. It probably feels like you’re doing something wrong or you’re a bad employee, but most likely you’re just in a temporary rut.
Any name can contain a space. For example "Ana Maria" is a common first name which contains a space. On official documents, generally a name will be separated into a given name and surname. In this case "<A> <B C>" and "<A B> C" are considered separate names.
Source: I have a space in my name and some of my different identity documents have the name as "<A> <B C>" or "<A B> C", which causes all sorts of administrative problems.
Leonardo da Vinci is another famous example of a last name with two words in it. It's very common in romance languages. Plus, lots of people in the American south just flat out have two first names or two middle names.
Last names in many places evolved from that same need to disambiguate between people though. Attach some marker of connection to a place (common in Finland, e.g. Joensuu meaning "mouth of river"), profession (common in Germany and UK, e.g. Müller, Cooper, meaning mill worker and barrelmaker), lineage (common in Iceland, e.g. Grímsson meaning "son of Grímur"), or some other culturally relevant characteristic.
Nowadays the meanings of our last names have largely disappeared, so you have countless Coopers who have never touched a barrel in their lives, whose children will be called Cooper also, despite that. I think it's a little sad that so much of what people call us is semantically equivalent to a random UUID with tons of namespace collision. With that in mind, I'd say "da Vinci" is more a last name than most of us have.
Having a name with "of Region/city/former kingdom/..." is often their last name. Unless you want to claim that these people do not have a last name.
I can understand that in some cultures this might seem weird or antiquated but here in Germany these names are reality. Sometimes people with such names are descendents of royalty and sometimes someones last name "from family-name" is thier last name and happens to historically correspond to one of germany's state names or city names or just a little town.
One a side note: In Germany in 1919-1920 royalty was no longer a legal aspect that changed how laws applied to you[1]. When that happened titles that were reserved for ruling functions (king, grand duke) were removed and all other titles were moved to be part of the persons name (such as prince etc.) and could not be decreed on anyone new. These titles still exist in Germany but are simply naming "conventions" in a formerly royal family.
Correct: his full name as given was "Lionardo di ser Piero da Vinci," meaning more or less Piero's son Lionardo from Vinci. Deriving a childs name from their lineage was incredibly common.
Documents aside, do you consider <B> to be a given name (parent came up with it) or a surname (parent already had it)? If given, do you consider it optional (i.e., middle rather than first)? Sorry in advance for any shortsighted assumptions about the possibilities here!
If an investor wants returns that are orthogonal to the market or that avoid exposure to specific factors, then ETFs aren't really an option. This is why pension funds etc. will have some investments in index funds but will also diversify into hedge funds and alternative investments.
Hedge funds and related investment vehicles aren't for most people, but they do perform an important function in the markets. Not everyone can invest passively -- someone has to actually enable price discovery.
Moreover, in a highly correlated world it is unsurprising that institutional investors are eager for less correlated sources of return. The problem is actually finding it: as an allocator you are being adversely selected against. If a hedge fund is willing to take your money, we'll maybe it isn't that great of an opportunity after all.
Just sharing a different perspective, I'm from Sydney and have lived in all 3 and don't agree with this generalisation. I know plenty of Sydney-raised people who've lived in London or New York for decades, love those places, and don't plan to move back to Sydney any time soon if at all.
reply