d4adb33f

6 ms·

1.
by d4adb33f 10y ago
Why indeed? Given the pathological situation, I would however take steps to protect my free time, if changing jobs was not an option.
2.
by d4adb33f 10y ago
If you do not want to invest or start a company, then your only option is to find a job. With solid programming skills, you should be able to find a company to sponsor you. I know nothing about you, so I really can't recommend anything
3.
by d4adb33f 10y ago
> if possible. Aye, there's the rub.
4.
by d4adb33f 10y ago
Makes me think of the Foo Fighters song. Wouldn't the rational thing be to turn off your phone when you take a vacation or even leave it at the office?
5.
by d4adb33f 10y ago
It's not very hard, if you have money or skills that are in demand. Top countries depend on what you are looking for.
6.
by d4adb33f 10y ago
> After all if you're salaries at a 24x7 operational company, if you want a Saturday off with guaranteed no phone calls, you need to take vacation. And people put up with this?
7.
by d4adb33f 10y ago
That's some serious WTF, unless you were the only person in the company able to do that and it was an extinction event for the company if nobody dealt with it.
8.
by d4adb33f 10y ago
I am baffled why anybody would either do or accept any of the above.
9.
by d4adb33f 10y ago
About the same according to a quick Google search. "It usually adds up to five weeks of vacation plus around nine public holidays (plus other possible company paid holidays or additional vacation time)." Source: http://
10.
by d4adb33f 10y ago
Appeasement does not (always|ever) lead to progress. In civilized countries secular law trumps religious law.
11.
by d4adb33f 10y ago
>> You do not need your body after you are dead. > How do you know? Have you ever been dead? Do you know any people who have died? As soon as anybody comes back from the dead to object, I'll reconsider my opinion. Until then
12.
by d4adb33f 10y ago
> This is insane Is it? Is it really more insane than believing you need your organs after you are dead? > But please don't advocate for your contempt to be codified into laws Why not? People do it all the time :) At least my age
13.
by d4adb33f 10y ago
I'm good with losing state after death. It's not like people aren't maimed (involuntary) before death also. I'm also good with door number two. If you are to be cryonically preserved then you should not even need to opt-
14.
by d4adb33f 10y ago
Sure, but this has no relation to what happens to your body when you are dead, unless you deed your body in your will.
15.
by d4adb33f 10y ago
> Transplants don't save lives, they violate it in the worst possible way. Wait, what? I don't even know where to begin. That whole sentence does not make any sense. > And allowing the state to harvest your organs without yo
16.
by d4adb33f 10y ago
> From a society's perspective opt-out makes perfect sense." It's very troubling to follow that line of thought. It's also arguably in societies interest to make all your private medical data publicly available for re
17.
by d4adb33f 10y ago
You do not need your body after you are dead. This is good for society. If anything the opt out should be further restricted. You may opt out, but you'd need a valid reason. Any held superstition should not be grounds.