I think you're most certainly right that the negative visualization is a central part of Stoic philosophy as it's applicable today but I don't think you're example is correct in this scenario. Instead, in this case, I think it's appropriate to not drive the car and/or to remember that no matter how old the car is, it is still far-far better than the worst possible reality such as that where the OP doesn't own a car, or has one in significantly worse shape.
I like to practice this own philosophy in my life to remind myself that no matter how frustrated I am with my possessions or with my work that I could be in a much worse place than I am currently. It also helps, a lot, to be a minimalist because it makes you all that much more appreciative of the few things you have (especially when you own good ones!).
Yep. I completely understand and agree with your sentiment. I am in the same position now and when I leave the state school to visit friends at "elite schools" the entire vibe is changed. There is an incentive to be the best and constantly learn there, will at a large university it's more about just passing through the system.
I think it would be good practice in this case to apply MLA rules to this block quote as it is rather confusing to read in it's current state. MLA says that within a set of quotations, any subsequent quotations will then be indicated by '' rather than "".
More surprising to me than this article was the fact that Bloomberg has spiraled off a completely different brand for editorials/commentary/opinion. It amazes me that Bloomberg View which bears the Bloomberg brand has no clear explanation of what it is, and that it is only commentary.
This looks absolutely insane. It seems as though someone just taped a pile of these crystal bricks to the top of the drone and let it fly. Astonishing.
I believe it's the bottom, not the top. The drone is upside down in that picture.
Anyway, it makes me think of the "move fast and break stuff" philosophy we see in software. Someone willing to throw stuff together and give it a shot will be flying while a careful planner is still planning. Flying, and quite possibly crashing, of course.
Is that engineer reporting the $750,000 salary statistically significant? I feel that based on the averages excluding this salary it would be best to view that data point as an outlier.
A single data point is never "statistically significant" on its own. What you probably mean to ask is whether its standard score is likely assuming a standard normal distribution of values [0]. Without running the numbers, I would guess not.
I know someone in HFT whose base salary is $150,000 but got a 10x bonus (he made $1.65 million) last year. Average bonus in his HFT are 2-10x base salary he says.
any decent stats analysis has built in outlier detection and ignores them, there are people that either lie or just make stuff up for attention and detecting these (data trolls) is just part of the analysis. Blindly averaging is never effective.
Why would they all be data trolls who lie or hope for attention?
Fwiw, 250k+ seems fairly standard in some fields I've interacted with. You don't need to look very far to find them either. A good Oracle DBA will make that or more in a reasonably large corporate environment; so will a good SEO hacker in the gambling industry insofar as I've interacted with them.
It does beg one question though: how high in the corporate hierarchy were the positions with, say, $360k/year or more? If the salary is that of an IT exec in large corporations, it's not necessarily comparable to the salary of IT staff underneath them or of the consultants they might hire. (Only one thing seems reasonably sure: they weren't working for early stage start-ups.)
Why? It's not impossible to think that there is an engineer somewhere out there contributing seven figures a year to a company's bottom line . . . why shouldn't they capture a significant part of that productivity?
I find this an interesting departure by the trend which has been set by the previous phones in the Nexus program. Prior phones followed an average lower price that what is most likely to be seen here. Given that the Nexus program has stood as the pinnacle of the Android environment more so than just simply being "reference" hardware it does seem logical to me that Google would want to escalate the quality and produce a true flagship. That being said, this is also atypical and as much as it plays into the trend of higher quality for the entire ecosystem, it also undermines their tenant of simply finding hardware which promotes the qualities that the OS does. In the end it is most likely I will still buy the phone, but still, on morals, I dislike the anticipated pricing.
