jungledeuce

I had a single terrible experience with dissociatives, to the point that for many many years I had ongoing panic attacks. It was an absolute nightmare for a long time as I was never sure when one might strike.

Without data it’s hard to say how dangerous these drugs are, but they are dangerous. People will pipe in with how you need the right setting and mindset and on and on, it’s never the drug it’s always the patient. But even if that’s all true, none of that is objectively verifiable, people will still have terrible, life-changing experiences, and we should better understand the rate at which they will before prescribing it broadly.

You don’t know enough white suburban conservative Christian seniors. I agree it’s not exactly a huge group, but in my experience in the Midwest that’s where you might find disgust.

Everywhere else? I agree, normal people are not in general “disgusted” by kids at parties dancing all night dressed in neon or whatever the kids these days do.

The disruption of making several hundreds of thousands of dollars more than they would have outside of FAANG?

I’ll take some of that kind of disruption, please.

Sure, shady companies exist. And you shouldn’t trust shady companies to self report. But… you already know that, it’s in the name! “Shady”. So I think the idea that you should never trust self reporting is indeed an over reaction.

However, having been at (what I deemed) non-shady companies, there’s still the very human desire to downplay as much as is reasonable. Shady companies overstep reasonability on purpose.

You mean to tell me that Apple could have created thousands of high paying jobs, if only for several years, but didn’t. And this is good? I can never remember who to be mad at.

More seriously, I realize this is just clickbait, but I wonder how you could determine objectively which approach (hiring slow and needing to catch up, hiring medium, hiring fast and needing to fire) is “better for business”. Seems very hard to control variables.