some will go through heart wrenching decisions picking who to save.
In some sense, you are right. Some no doubt don't think much of firing 1000, some will go through heart wrenching decisions picking who to save. However, "lacking conscience and empathy" would be too big a draw-back with many other decision making process. Lacking empathy alone will greatly reduce the quality of his/her decisions lack alone lacking conscience.
In some sense, you are right. Some no doubt don't think much of firing 1000, some will go through heart wrenching decisions picking who to save. However, "lacking conscience and empathy" would be too big a draw-back with many other decision making process. Lacking empathy alone will greatly reduce the quality of his/her decisions lack alone lacking conscience.I doubt that. Look on Youtube for the shockumentary called 'The yes men fix the world'. See how real businessmen and CEOs react to moral dillemmas.
In some sense, you are right. Some no doubt don't think much of firing 1000, some will go through heart wrenching decisions picking who to save. However, "lacking conscience and empathy" would be too big a draw-back with many other decision making process. Lacking empathy alone will greatly reduce the quality of his/her decisions lack alone lacking conscience.I doubt that. Look on Youtube for the shockumentary called 'The yes men fix the world'. See how real businessmen and CEOs react to moral dillemmas.
In some sense, you are right. Some no doubt don't think much of firing 1000, some will go through heart wrenching decisions picking who to save. However, "lacking conscience and empathy" would be too big a draw-back with many other decision making process. Lacking empathy alone will greatly reduce the quality of his/her decisions lack alone lacking conscience.I doubt that. Look on Youtube for the shockumentary called 'The yes men fix the world'. See how real businessmen and CEOs react to moral dillemmas.
What is it that you doubt?
Quotesome will go through heart wrenching decisions picking who to save.
I have been in turn-arounds for a few times and it is some of the hardest decisions I had to make. You have to balance the well-beings of the rest of the organization and its employees and those that you let go.
Letting go someone you know well personally is the hardest. You know how it will impact not just the employees but also their families.
In some sense, you are right. Some no doubt don't think much of firing 1000, some will go through heart wrenching decisions picking who to save. However, "lacking conscience and empathy" would be too big a draw-back with many other decision making process. Lacking empathy alone will greatly reduce the quality of his/her decisions lack alone lacking conscience.I doubt that. Look on Youtube for the shockumentary called 'The yes men fix the world'. See how real businessmen and CEOs react to moral dillemmas.
What is it that you doubt?That corporate managers have a conscience
the representation of sociopaths is higher among CEOs (and lawyers) than in the rest of the population..
The probablity of finding a genius among the mentally retarded is far higher than that among normal people....
sociopaths / CEOs are all not average joe. Obviously, you will have an easier time find non-average-joe amongst non-average-joes, just as you would more likely find tall people among NBA players, fast runners among sprinters, strong people among weight lifers....
Or sociopaths among socially inept people, like scientists or engineers, or geniuses,
The probablity of finding a genius among the mentally retarded is far higher than that among normal people....
sociopaths / CEOs are all not average joe. Obviously, you will have an easier time find non-average-joe amongst non-average-joes, just as you would more likely find tall people among NBA players, fast runners among sprinters, strong people among weight lifers....
Or sociopaths among socially inept people, like scientists or engineers, or geniuses,The first and last paragraphs don't make much sense, by the definitions of the words. Someone who is mentally retarded is almost never a genius, even if you will find some statistical anomalies (savants, classically called idiot savants). A sociopath is good at being socially manipulative, and is unlikely to be socially inept, again by definition.
Sociopaths are not more common among CEOs because those groups are both outliers, but because a sociopath would have the necessary skills to become an CEO. As a sociopath, you are more likely to be able to disregard others for your own, and your company's profit. But the discussion that then follows is whether this is good or bad for society at large. By the common libertarian/anarchocapitalist logic, all is as it should. But you might also argue that having sociopaths in power can be destructive for society. You might also argue that a debt collector will be more successful at his profession if he's willing to bust the kneecaps of people who won't pay up. That doesn't mean it's a good idea for it to be socially acceptable for debt collectors to apply bodily harm to the people who are in debt.
What the 'yes men' are showing is that CEOs and managers operate from a distance and seem to get disconnected from the real world. That doesn't mean that they are sociopaths perse but they do believe that they serve the greater good by their mallicious acts (can I make a comparison with nazis for a clear example?).
Yes you may. Godwin's law confirmed, thank you!
What the 'yes men' are showing is that CEOs and managers operate from a distance and seem to get disconnected from the real world. That doesn't mean that they are sociopaths perse but they do believe that they serve the greater good by their mallicious acts (can I make a comparison with nazis for a clear example?).
You go completely past the point of having a moral compass.
You go completely past the point of having a moral compass.
You go completely past the point of having a moral compass.
Since this reply is immediately after my reply, I have to ask - are you referring to me?
If it is indeed referring to me, please enlighten me on which part of my reply is so immoral.
Rick
I've just received my cheap eBay FTDI board and I am extremely disappointed that it evaluates as a genuine chip.You bought via ebay, ergo it is fake by default.
I've just received my cheap eBay FTDI board and Any idea if this *looks* like a real one?Doesn't matter. You didn't buy the chip via an authorized reseller and solder it onto the board yourself / bought the widget from a genuine chip customer (the ones they won't name), ergo it is fake by default.
Even if you were to dissolve the top, put it under a microscope, and deduce that it is an exact duplicate of a genuine FTDI chip: that just means the counterfeiter in question must have been doing a better job; fake by default applies.
Uhhh, are you saying that genuine chips cannot be available on eBay at all? As in not possible?
Uhhh, are you saying that genuine chips cannot be available on eBay at all? As in not possible?
Uhhh, are you saying that genuine chips cannot be available on eBay at all? As in not possible?
It's gotten to a point on ebay whereby you almost have to assume that all parts are fake. And not just FTDI chips, but probably most parts.
Uhhh, are you saying that genuine chips cannot be available on eBay at all? As in not possible?
It's gotten to a point on ebay whereby you almost have to assume that all parts are fake. And not just FTDI chips, but probably most parts.