AIUI This relationship between PG&E and SF/CPUC has a corrupt history dating back to the 90s with Willie Brown and later even Kamala Harris.
It's a part of why Republicans actually have some grounds for calling Harris corrupt - Willie Brown's office when mayor of SF was notorious for being a pay-to-play situation, she worked there (and even dated him).
> Or, as Supervisor Aaron Peskin described it, “mind-boggling.” He said
> the “city family” that grew up under Mayor Willie Brown, continued
> working under Mayor Gavin Newsom, flourished under Mayor Ed Lee and
> stayed on under Breed “were all doing favors for one another and
> living in their own little bubble.”
>
> “They all convinced each other that they were like a family, and
> family can give gifts to their children,” Peskin said, noting those
> same family members took the city’s required annual ethics training
> like everybody else and must have known what they were doing was
> wrong.
>
> “They just got too cozy over too much time, and they lost their way,”
> Peskin said. “Now I have to look at everybody going, ‘Are you a
> crook?’ It’s not the way I want to see the world.”
There's no need for missing answers as to why copper is appreciated as a water transport/storage medium. It's the same reason it's traditionally used as cladding on boat hulls, and is still added to many anti-fouling bottom paints - it's antimicrobial, but also toxic.
Rogan is obviously pro psychedelics, and was even featured in the oval office during the recent Ibogaine approval signing. I think it's worth noting if this N=1 "study" has any association with such an obviously biased and influential individual.
I mean.. I've seen the preliminary studies on treatment resistent PTSD so I'm also pro psychedelics, because I'm anti suicide.
Dismissing this "study" (really a case file) because of the N=1 and the shady journal seems like a stronger position than bringing in Rogan. Talking about Rogan just looks like partisan posturing.
If everyone in the team behaves this way there's no substrate creating opportunities for people like this to capitalize on.
I often fall into this role, and historically have made some quite large impacts because of it. But I take issue with TFA's position of doing nothing being a critical component of being effective and available to attack these problems.
I'm practically never doing nothing when employed. But I'm often looking like nothing is being done through the lens of ticket-oriented accounting. If the author means doing nothing by the metrics, ok, I can agree with them there. But it better be because you're too busy down in the weeds becoming one with the product and grokking details of created messes past and present.
If you're literally doing nothing, you won't be positioned well to understand the implementation details, and you won't be positioned well politically/socially within the org to thrive and be genuinely appreciated by your peers.
This is a complicated precarious path to take if you have any intention of lasting in the org. It's difficult to not accumulate enemies with every win you take at the expense of everyone else being too busy being the substrate you're scavenging. Management and your peers must come to appreciate you're filling a critical void, but the void is implicit and unaccounted for, making this tricky - it's built on trust.
They can see your selective work as exploitation while they take up the slack you create. From their perspective they're overworked because people like you don't do enough to balance the workload.
You need to be recognized as an enabler, the one minding the details, omnipresent - not AWOL doing nothing. Catching the fuckups early, preventing incidents while the green-field chaos monkeys carry on. The win is for the team, and you're effectively being a self-directed janitor cleaning messes nobody knew existed.
The reward for this role, as it really is otherwise somewhat thankless, is the autonomy. It's a management failure when these people get put on a pedestal and promoted more than the people doing the grunt work. That creates animosity within the ranks.
disclaimer: not a manager, not a lead, but often the guy in the corner course-correcting and fixing/preventing horribly broken customer-impacting mistakes. These are just some observations based on decades of startups and in recent years FAANG experience as an SDE.
I've noticed there's a pattern of behavior with folks living in the forested parts of California where they expect everyone else to subsidize their impractical choice on where to put a house.
Extreme wildfire risks? let everyone else shoulder the cost, don't deny our fire insurance.
Power delivery infra costs (and associated risks, see wildfires)? don't make us actually pay for this, we're all in this together guys!
It's a part of why Republicans actually have some grounds for calling Harris corrupt - Willie Brown's office when mayor of SF was notorious for being a pay-to-play situation, she worked there (and even dated him).
from: https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/heatherknight/article/S-...It's trivial to find articles about the conflicts of interests between Brown and PG&E, I think even to this day he still represents their interests.
reply