The scientific name for raccoon is trash panda.

Yes, I can explain it. Professionalism is built upon mutual respect between employer and employee, for many reasons. Let’s start by saying that it is just as important for the employer to listen to the professional as the other way around. That means there are no “preconditions” or other wage-slave concepts involved. Employers who lose the respect of their professional staff are unlikely to continue to succeed. Professional relationships are fundamentally different from unskilled labor relationships because employers are specifically depending on professionals to tell them about the best way to accomplish the job and compete in the marketplace. It’s the same reason why you’ll hire a lawyer instead of representing yourself in court - because you actually want to win and you’re not stupid enough to believe that you know best

But, imagine a simpler scenario. Imagine if you hired a plumber and you told him to use toilet paper tubes for plumbing instead of actual pipes. Yes, the plumber will tell you to go fuck your self and refuse to carry out the job the way you want. But the bigger issue is that if you plumb your house with toilet paper tubes, you’re going to be sorry. Your plumbing won’t work. You should have listened to your plumber.

Does that make sense?

So when you are playing these simple dumb-shit power dynamics in your head about who is paying for what and what they get to decide, it’s not that simple.

Let’s put it another way. If every Apple employee who disagreed with Apple HR and MBA brain farts decided to actually quit, everyone would lose. The professionals would have to find jobs that paid less. And Apple would ultimately go to the waste bin of history.

It matters because you don't even understand what the word "precondition" means. Clearly you have never worked as a professional in a professional setting.

What is it that you do for a living? It might make it easier for me to explain how this works to you if I knew where you're actually coming from.

They're literally not paying you to show up to work. Out of all the things they pay you for, that is the one thing they definitely don't.

Moreover, that's not how any of this works. Professional relationships between employer and professional are built around mutual respect. You have no idea how much damage this is doing to employers. They can never be respected again by any employee who works for them.

I don't need to start my own company to demand that I get paid for my time. That applies to every job, ever. I also don't need to start my own company to negotiate the terms of my labor and working conditions. This is especially true for exempt salaried positions for high skilled professionals. They are the subject matter experts, not the executives. If you don't believe it then let's switch to hourly pay with time and a half overtime. Then we'll talk.

See this is what you've got completely ass backwards. It's not their dollar. They're not paying you for your commute, they're telling you to use your own money to do that.

You should look into the inflation that's happened since a few years ago. Housing prices up, car prices up, everything is more expensive now. The last thing worker want to do is spend thousands of dollars commuting just to kiss their boss's ass in person.

We all know that without Fox News and Facebook, you would not have any friends. Your world would only be filled by people like me, telling you the truth, telling you that you're nuts. That's why it's so important to you to defend Fox News and Facebook. Literally like an addict when their family tries to throw away their stash. What would you do without all the right wing lies that you've built your entire world around?

Yep, I know. Brother, you don't have to convince me twice that you've cut out the middle man and gone straight for the fully concentrated good stuff. You're hooked up to the online feeds straight from Russia and China.

Yes, we already know the nonsense that Tucker, Hanity, and Russian intelligence services told you to think.

You’re probably going to need therapy once you realize that Fox News is getting it’s ass handed to you in court for lying to people such as yourself. If you are so smart that you think you can find proof of Jewish Space Lasers programming the minds of the “left wing” billionaire corporate owners, I suggest you sue CNN, ABC, NBC, etc., yourself. Will love to see your proof, will be very entertaining. Until then, actual provable disinformation and anti-American incitement is being spread by Fox News and Facebook.

So how about them? They are all right wing outlets owned by conservative billionaires. But they are not as bad as Fox News and Facebook in spreading Chinese and Russian propaganda, instigating violent insurrections, and filling impressionable redneck minds with nonsense.

Fox News and Facebook are mainstream.

Think about it this way. People have such a low confidence in your intelligence, they basically concluded that your entire opinion is nothing more than what Facebook and Fox News told you to think. But if you think they are wrong, because you plan to still be an idiot even if these right wing propaganda machines didn’t exist, then you shouldn’t have any concerns about holding both companies accountable for their lies.

ctrl-f it: https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/redacted-documents-in-dominion-fox-news-case/dca5e3880422426f/full.pdf

The same corporation whose internal communications were quoted in the Dominion lawsuit followed by a one word summary by Dominion’s lawyers: “exactly”.

Have you ever actually read it?

> A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state...

I guess you never read it.

Nothing much. People were already doing this for 50 years. Using computers and using machine learning, too. Generating millions of random protein formulas is the easy part. The hard part is manufacturing them and testing them because that's still like looking for a needle in a haystack. But by improving the machine learning approach, it gave the researchers a smaller haystack.

Also dumb and untrue on many many levels.

It doesn't distinguish between the militia and the citizenry. The purpose is to secure the state. You have the right to bear arms as part of a well regulated militia. That's your right as a "regular citizen".

This amendment has been completely perverted by traitors over time where now, people like you think it means that you, as an anti-government terrorist, dangerous lunatic, secessionist, white supremacist, serial killer, mass murder, or whatever other rogue element in society you belong to, believe that you have a constitutional right to threaten the security of the state.

My history professor? You mean the military officers who taught me military history when I served in the US military? You're telling me that I shouldn't listen to people who actually understand history? Instead I should listen to whom, exactly? Some redneck terrorist who thinks the Founding Fathers whisper sweet nothings in his ear?

Everything I told you is the context that you have to understand if you have any hope of understanding what the 2nd Amendment means by the "well regulated militia" and why it says they are necessary for the security of the state. It's referring to the state-level militias at a time when those were the only military means for the USA to defend itself. It's not referring to some right wing lunatics practicing to overthrow the government in some backwoods red state.

The Continental Army was formed after the war started and consisted of completely untrained volunteers. Do you see what this means? The first battles were fought by militias. In some cases, militias from New York and Massachusetts had to be incorporated into the Continental Army. The Continental Army was disbanded immediately after the Treaty of Paris was signed, which ended the war. So only the militias were left after that. The way you would become an officer in the Revolutionary War was very simple - you'd be a rich guy, maybe you had a little military experience, you were friends with someone like Ben Franklin and he'd vouch for you (Lafayette), or you'd get off a boat and introduce yourself to George Washington (Pulaski).

The first military academy in the USA wasn't founded until 1802. Given your limited knowledge I can see why you don't want to talk about that. Just a reminder that the Revolutionary War started before then, in 1775. And it's kind of "important", you know, if you want to talk about the entire concept of a professional army that isn't just a ragtag group of citizen soldiers. Remember - at the time when the US Constitution was signed, in 1787, there was no professional army, only militias, and the federal government was completely broke.

They called it a militia. They didn’t have a standing army. They didn’t have military academies, the only people who would get a military education were wealthy aristocrats.

So is the standing army. They’re all volunteers, all of them take an oath to defend the constitution.

A rational individual would tell a Russian dissident to stay home rather than deal with the possibility of triggering NATO's Article 5 on behalf of a film festival.