Would it be against Japanese etiquette to simply write "Please Don't Reposition" on these work shoes? Seems like that would reduce the number of times this happens.
Congratulations and count yourself among the lucky. But if you cannot appreciate that things will not be that way for many employment situations then you don't know how lucky you are.
It's not a matter of luck, it's a function of the degree to which one's psyche is fragmented.
The default in my industry is exactly as you describe. The only reason it isn't so for me is because I refused to give over my autonomy and have remained in touch with my intrinsic motivations. The job/role/industry is irrelevant as far as causation, I'm just mentioning mine for context.
You dislike engineers because they are acting like engineers instead of artists? The typical engineer is a paid mercenary, working to get widget 2.0 out the door. They are not robots, but are paid to play nice with others to advance their employer's interests. To act like a temperamental artiste in that environment would be immature and unprofessional.
I was about to say something similar. It may be true that the ideal image of the entrepreneur is the exception rather than the typical for the self-employed, but I would say the same for the image the author paints of the career employee. For every self-actualized employee with an enriching network, meaningful work, and supportive surroundings there are many more who are just trying to make ends meet in a meaningless, toxic, soul-sucking environment. The grass is very much greener on the other side...
"Although the standard is a little more complicated..."
If you have ever read the software control category definitions in MIL-STD-882E you know that the definitions that this blog author gives are very much his interpretation. The actual definitions in 882E are a god awful mess. Multiple contradictory definitions provided for the same category. Additional parenthetical statements that are intended to clarify, but just muddy the picture further. Yikes...
I was just thinking about this. Exposure from a short is theoretically limitless. Some sort of derivative would be a better approach? Asking for a financially clueless friend.
The financially illiterate don't understand that "going short" is not the simple reverse of "going long" and that there are more difficulties involved with borrowing stocks to short or in buying puts. Well, puts are easy to buy, at least, but the manner in which they decay makes it hard to win with that strategy, harder, in fact, than buying calls to go long. But yes, you can technically buy puts. You can also play Powerball.
reply