Chris Voss talks about this in his book "Never Split the Difference".
He advocates for teams of people handling a negotiation with the most experienced negotiator just observing.
The reason: it's incredibly difficult to be process, crafting and delivering responses in real time. If your primary goal is to observe the other side, that should be your sole focus. It's also incredibly valuable to have that observation hence why you should negotiate in teams (or at least pairs).
The second sentence of the article strongly implies some nefarious concentration of power and wealth among the globally powerful countries is at the root of the popularity of mercator projections.
Well, they is a "nefarious concentration of power and wealth among the globally powerful countries". And the Mercator projection does suit them practically, and shows their countries bigger than they are, so...
> And the Mercator projection does suit them practically, and shows their countries bigger than they are, so...
So what?
Do these countries become more powerful, richer, or have more resources than others because they are represented bigger on a common map projection? If so, then let's just hope that our new overlords from the Antarctican Coalition are benign emperors :D
>Do these countries become more powerful, richer, or have more resources than others because they are represented bigger on a common map projection?
No. They become so by colonizing and stealing other's resources. Then the map projections that are convenient for them, are imposed upon the rest of humanity.
This, among other legitimate uses, has the side-benefit for them of presenting said countries as larger than they are, and thus being one more way to subconsciously hammer onto everybody their superiority at that level too...
> They become so by colonizing and stealing other's resources.
Pretty sure all of the former colonies are independent nations by now, and have been for more than a generation.
> Then the map projections that are convenient for them, are imposed upon the rest of humanity.
Excuse me? Who is imposing what on whom now, and how?
Last time I checked, everyone is free to use whatever map projection they want, centered on whatever point of the globe they want. Or they can use an actual globe.
> has the side-benefit for them of presenting said countries as larger than they are, and thus being one more way to subconsciously hammer onto everybody their superiority at that level too...
Yeah, pretty sure I don't perceive Antarctica as some kind of superior super-nation. Or greenland, although I gotta say, it's a really cool place, especially during summer.
>Pretty sure all of the former colonies are independent nations by now, and have been for more than a generation.
Yes. And if someone breaks your legs, you should totally be able to run a marathon after, say, 15 years. After all, they haven't broke your legs for a while.
History and national development doesn't work like that. A major handicap can still keep you back for centuries.
It's even more than a handicap relatively too. It's not just that you were held down (and the other side neutral): the handicap for you was at the same time an enrichment off your back for the other side.
Even more more so, since "independent nations" is mostly a facade for the busines as usual, of neocolonialism: the same shit, but somewhat more convert (bribing politicians, setting up banana-republic conditions, if needed bringing in the army, supporting this or that dictator into power, and so on, and using monetary policy and foreign aid to make sure they never stand on their legs).
Yeah, I'm not gonna discuss colonialism here. Multiple generations are a long time to get things in order. Many countries rebuilt from scratch into powerful industrialized nations within decades after major wars.
And it's also not the topic of the discussion tbh. This is about the impact of the Mercator projection, and unless I get to see a peer reviewed study convincing me otherwise, my point stands.
That is entirely on you tho. Becasuse that sentence does not imply anything about concentration of power nor about globally powerful countries and even nothing about origin of popularity of mercator projections.
It does imply that poor countries around equator are bigger then they look like. That is it.
The government will punish me and the company if I do that. I am also forced to take my vacation. Even when the government says I can't go anywhere. I. Must. Not. Work.
If you're talking about labor laws, that is not true. They only specify that the employer cannot demand you to work 7 days a week, but you still can if you choose to (e.g. as a contractor).
Either that, or we could reorganize public schools to get back on track as to what their purpose actually is.
I don't want crazy religious idea being taught, I don't want people's opinions about how there are 57 genders being taught and I don't want a teacher or a school district trying to instill their chosen value system on my child. I want them to learn how to read. I want them to learn how to write. I want them to learn how to add and subtract. Frankly, considering how miserably school systems are failing to teach kids basic literacy, they should be embarrassed to even discuss their cultural, religious and/or political agenda (even when they insist that their agenda isn't cultural, religious and/or political).
When I was in school ~40 years ago, with 3 or 4 exceptions out of a class of ~100, every child could read, write and do math at or near grade level. I didn't know a single thing about the personal lives of any of my teachers, whether they were married, had kids, and certainly not what their sexual orientation was. It didn't matter - because they were there to teach academic subjects! Nor did any of my teachers know (or concern themselves with) my personal life, my sexual orientation or anything else aside from my academic performance in the subject they were teaching. There are a lot of reasonable, normal people who just want schools to become centers of academic learning again instead of another battleground in the cultural war.
At the same time you can agree the library having a few books where the protagonist has two mom's or two dad's isn't reducing the literacy rate of the school, right?
I'm still trying to square your "every parent has an absolute right to decide what their own children are exposed to" with parents who feel the round Earth is a lie.
>At the same time you can agree the library having a few books where the protagonist has two mom's or two dad's isn't reducing the literacy rate of the school, right?
I'm arguing that the literacy rate in the average school is currently so low in the United States that many students are unable to read at all. I'm arguing that anyone who is more concerned with the number of gender diverse library books than the number of students who are unable to read and write is part of the problem.
From most measures I can find, reading and math ability was higher pre-COVID than 40 years ago at US public schools. Maybe your experience with only 3% below grade level was 1) not an accurate measure given you were an elementary school student at the time and 2) just a single school out of literally many thousands in the US. I don't know about you, but my recollection of my elementary days sure isn't accurate enough to base an unbiased recollection of an entire nation of public schooling. I barely remember my grades, much less my classmates, much less the classmates the next classroom over or the next school over or the next district over or the next state over.
At my ultra prestigious school 60 years ago all seven members of my class could read and write at college level by third grade. Schools are so terrible compared to yesterday.
I'm still waiting to hear about what to do when a parent says the round Earth is against their beliefs and they have the right for their child to never be exposed to such absurd, extreme, and unnatural ideology. It seems pretty core to your idea that "every parent has an absolute right to decide what their own children are exposed to."
>From most measures I can find, reading and math ability was higher pre-COVID than 40 years ago at US public schools
In many of our largest cities, we are spending over $15,000 per student, every year. In many of these schools not a single student meets grade level standards in reading or math. That's right. Not one single student in the entire school. Let's take Baltimore, which spends over $17,000 per student, and has been one of the most outspoken cities about the need for a greater focus on "cultural education".
>Project Baltimore combed through the scores at all 150 City Schools where the state math test was given.
>Project Baltimore found, in 23 Baltimore City schools, there were zero students who tested proficient in math. Not a single student.
>Among the list of 23 schools, there are 10 high schools, eight elementary schools, three Middle/High schools and two Elementary/Middle schools.
>Exactly 2,000 students, in total, took the state math test at these schools. Not one could do math at grade level.
23 of 150 schools, 2000 students. Not a single student in any school proficient in math! Over $17,000 a student! A large number of the other districts had only 1 or 2 students proficient in the entire school. The highest grade-level proficiency in the entire city was 38%. If a city receives more than $17,000 per student, and turns out dozens of schools where not a single student is proficient, then that city has failed utterly in its educational mission. Suggesting that the problem is that they are "underfunded" (which is the en vogue political position of apologists for the educational system) is absolutely absurd. The failure of our public schools, and the widespread defense of that failure, is a microcosm of our societal failure at large.
New York State is now officially lowered its "proficiency standards" for testing, conceding that kids just aren't as literate or educated as they were in the past, and that standards must be lowered so that it can appear that our failed educational system is functioning.
But you can be sure that going forward, New York State officials will be comparing the "proficiency rates" of next year (with the lowered standards) with the kids from previous years, and pretending that kids are just as educated as before (if not touting their 'improvements'!)
It is one thing to argue for lower standards, less literacy and a generally less-educated population in lieu of an agenda of social and cultural indoctrination. It is an entirely other thing to pretend that our failed educational system is actually teaching our children to read, write and perform arithmetic at the levels it has done historically for over a century. We are going to suffers severe consequences as a nation raising a generation of children who cannot read, write, do basic arithmetic or think critically.
>I'm still waiting to hear about what to do when a parent says the round Earth is against their beliefs and they have the right for their child to never be exposed to such absurd, extreme, and unnatural ideology.
They can send their kid to a private school run my lunatics just like the parents who think there are 57 genders. Public school should be for sane, reasonable people who just want their kids to learn how to read and write and not be indoctrinated with any fringe madness.
Which do you think had a greater impact on our schools: books which have potentially gay characters, or the COVID pandemic?
When you see massively falling test scores after school districts got massively interrupted for a couple of years from a pandemic, do you think it's the pandemic response that caused it or acknowledging gay people exist?
Note, I made a point to mention aptitude pre-pandemic for a reason. I imagine 40 years ago you could have also found tons of entire schools where every student was below grade level. I do agree we need to improve schools. I don't think pulling books from the library because they might touch on a topic like gay families exist is doing anything meaningful to address it.
> not be indoctrinated with any fringe madness.
Fringe madness like the round earth right? I guess you're the arbiter of what is and is not fringe madness? Whatever happened to the parents being able to choose, suddenly when it's something you believe in it's just basic fact?
For the record, I'm not a flat earther. But at the same time when I hear people saying any nutjob should have the absolute right to dictate what the curriculum or books are in the school, you'll have to deal with this. Some parent wants to not have their kids exposed to gay or trans ideas or concepts. Some parents don't want their kids exposed to the theory of gravity. Empowering one of these groups to ban the books is also empowering the other.
So we agree that banning books on the topic of diversity is part of the problem, right? Because the bans don't add anything to the time and skills needed to teach reading or maths.
The only people who are concerned about it are the ones trying to take them away. The books in the library didnt tank literacy rates. Do you even hear how dumb that sounds? "Literacy is falling, so we should take books out of the library"
Hmm maybe it's a bad term. I was trying to convey the fact that gamers that enjoy something like fallout or Diablo or Mass effect or RDR2, those types of gamers lose out when they lock themselves onto nintendo.
I for one like every genre but I find it unfortunate nintendo has a wierd focus on casual age friendly games.
Not sure anyone is contesting the idea that debt is a useful tool, merely the fact that these companies are typically predatory, preying on people who typically--can't pay their debts. In a country where medical care is expensive and not government-insured, it is sensible to question the societal value of debt collectors, which is all that is happening here.
Is it a shame? Could the guy instead have written an article entitled, "How to Protect Yourself (and Others) From the Worst Abuses of Debt Collectors"?
I probably have. I've been out of the industry since 2019 and I tend to create a lot of content. Since that is currently how I align I'd be surprised if I haven't done that somewhere.
The whole point of sarcasm is that people misunderstand causing funny situations. If you are going to signal it with eg. /s you may as well just say what you mean.
>she would always sit in with another interviewer and never ask any questions of the candidates. She would just observe.