If I ever write a short text on "cybersecurity ethics", it'll start with this. If something ever makes you feel uncomfortable, ask them to put it in writing or an e-mail (e-mails are discoverable in legal proceedings).
It goes both ways. Often times you are wrong about your ethical concern. If they are willing to put their request in writing, then there's probably no problem, and you should move forward.
Either way (they put it in writing or not), they've answered the ethical question. You don't have to argue with them.
As some point out, it's useful for a wide spectrum of disagreements, even non-ethical ones. Employees regularly walk away from verbal encounters with different understandings.
You've all experienced this. Sometimes a boss, peer, or underlying chronically misunderstands verbal communication. If you are in this situation, the only solution is to habitually write things down, such as in this technique:
Again, it works both ways. Maybe it's you and not the coworker who has the problem. Sending an email saying "these are the takeaways from our conversation" gives them a chance to correct your misunderstandings.
Note that this is usually not anybody's problem: that's why presidents and CEOs are always accompanied by a flunky whose job it is to record every promise they appear to have made to forestall any future understandings.
In other words, while "write it down" isn't common, it's not a breach of politeness when you demand they put it in writing. It's something all of us would be doing more often if we were more rational, responsible, and competent.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
One of the things about "misinformation" is that it's something only one side can possibly be guilty of. The other side can exaggerate as much as it wants without it being "misinformation". This "wobbling" moon is an example. twitter.com/i/events/14154…
Because of precession, there's a 18.61 and 4.4 year cycle where tides a vary. This means that as sea level rises, new records will be set at the peaks of those cycles instead of the troughs.
The NASA press release exaggerates what this means. Then the above story exaggerates the NASA press release. nasa.gov/feature/jpl/st…
The Internet as we know it starts around the 1880s with the first teletypes using 5-bit Baudot code (that later evolved into ASCII). This was pre-transistor/pre-vaccuum-tube age of electromechanical computing devices.
Here is a picture of the creators of Unix on an early Unix computer. What's missing from this picture is a "screen". They are using a teletype to access the Unix command-line, using 'ed' to edit files.
This 'vi' you love so much is just a full-screen version of the original 'ed'
This famous paper from 1964 proposing a packet-switched network to survive a nuclear attack? It was based on the existing telegraph network, assuming telegraph technologies.
One solution is "bent pipe". There are geostationary satellites that'll repeat a signal from the US to Cuba via a $2000 VSAT terminal that can be used to send/receive Internet signals. They are used in some places in the world, but this old tech is slow.
Then there's ViaSat/HughesNet with high-bandwidth geostationary satellites. The dishes probably cost $2k. Your chief problem with this (or VSATs) is that installation is a specialized skill.
God I hate Twitter's censorship. Yes, the following tweet is stupid, but at the same time, it's completely accurate and not at all "misleading". It's Twitter's annotation that is misleading.
The original tweet doesn't even question whether the vaccine is "safe".
It does claim "cells from abortions" were used, and that's essentially true.
Pfizer and Moderna used the HEK 293 cell line during testing (but not creation or production of the vaccine).
J&J uses the PER.C6 cell line for production. AstraZeneca uses the HEK 293 for production.
I first saw this during Occupy Wallstreet (a protest I disagree with). Those on the right called is "astroturf", pointing to all the organizes behind it. Yet, this got things backwards. "Organizers" were those who hijacked the popular movement, not those who created it.
Likewise, the Tea Party was a lot of sincere people with real concerns, hijacked on one side by professional politicians, and infected by fringe loonies on the other side.