Weblog

Saturday, 28 November 2009

  • The Paradox with Maternity Leave

    Here's a Theologianish question.

    Maternity leave benefits such as leave compensation and guaranteed job upon return are suppose to bring gender equality to the workplace and support woman's rights.

    However, maternity leave benefits probably cause more bias towards women during hiring and place a glass ceiling above their heads due to the extra risk and cost associated with hiring women in the workforce.

    Women can leave for months at any second while placing a huge burden on the company, especially if the woman is in a senior position.  For smaller companies, this is a very critical issue, especially if their budgets are tight to begin with. Companies are forced to pay the women on leave, and they can't hire people to replace their jobs, all of which hurt the bottom line.

    So basically, instead of creating more equality and rights for women, it's actually more detrimental to them during hiring which is the paradox experienced now.

    Do you think there should be maternity leave benefits at the risk of not getting hired in the first place?


    All I want for Christmas, is YOUUUUUUU!

Wednesday, 25 November 2009

  • November Skies

    My life has been incredibly busy lately, I sometimes feel like I don't have room to breathe.

    I finished up an investment banking M&A project and now I'm working at a large insurance company. The hours are long, the commute royally sucks, and my only consolation is that I get to keep a car in NYC paid for by the company of course.

    I have also been lightly looking for new opportunities because I'm getting bored of consulting. I have second round interviews with a hedge fund coming up, I'm pretty apathetic to it all, but if the pay is really good, I just might go for it. I've realized that no matter what corporate job I take, in the end, it's all the same. The long hours, the corporate BS, none of it interests me anymore.

    With that said, I've incorporated my new business with my two partners. We're a real legal entity now, and I get to bring home some equity, of course our equity is worthless at the moment, but I'm hoping that will change in the future.

    Lastly, working on so many things at once has left me very far removed from the outside world. I forgot what it feels like to just relax without worries. Reaching for the top is indeed a long and lonely road.


    Gimme moaaarrrrr

Friday, 20 November 2009

Thursday, 19 November 2009

  • Brain Food: There is no such thing as reality

    What is real and how do you define it? Just because we can see something, and touch something, does that truly mean it exists? One of my favorite existentialist questions involves the concept of the human consciousness. Basically, how does a person know that he or she is not the only person with consciousness? What if everyone else was just a robot pretending to display human characteristics?

    Our understanding of the world, is only as sophisticated as our brain allows

    In psychology, we learn a lot about mental disorders and what they reveal about how our mind works. In one study on Anosognosia, a person who recently had her left arm paralyzed due to an accident denied the existence of that arm. When the doctors asked her to move the arm, she witnessed the arm not moving and claimed that the arm wasn't hers, but instead belonged to her daughter.

    Doctors conducted more tests and concluded that the reason why this patient was unable to identify her arm as being hers was because there was some sort of damage in the part of her brain that connected the left and right hemispheres, particularly around the region concerned with logic. Thus, instead of logically viewing the unmoving arm as damaged, she used another part of her brain to compensate and make up excuses as to why the arm wasn't moving, mainly that it didn't belong to her.

    The implication of this study is that we, as humans, only understand the world as much as our brain allows us to. We can only understand what we can gather from our 5 senses, and even then, our understanding is only half complete. With that said, it is incredibly easy to alter our understanding of reality. Optical illusions are a wonderful example of how our sense of sight can be tricked, other examples include taking pills to change acidic flavors into sweet ones or using mind altering drugs to change how we perceive the world.

    What is real?

    This brings us back to my original question of what is real and how do we define it? Is something real if everyone agrees it's real? If you've seen the Matrix, you'll know that the idea of "real" can be a very complicated thing. I hate using the Matrix as an example, but I'm going to do it anyway... what's to say we're not just all part of some big computer program and some AI isn't controlling our mind and using our brains as a power source?

    The answer is that it is impossible to know for sure. There is no such thing as definitive truth, only a high probability of what we believe to be true. If I told you that the Earth was flat, you'd probably laugh at me, but what if I told you that we were incapable of viewing the Earth as round, because there was some fundamental flaw in how our brains perceived three dimensions. And to compensate, we made up an extraordinary number of excuses as to why it was flat. I guess that's a far fetched idea... but not really, especially when you consider that a woman can also mistake her own arm as belonging to someone else.

    further reading http://lesswrong.com/lw/20/the_apologist_and_the_revolutionary/


    blood rushing away from head... cannot think anymore...

Wednesday, 18 November 2009

  • Atheism vs Theism

    An amazing reddit article on religion, so good, it deserves it's own post.

    read it here: http://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/9fg1b/atheism_vs_theism_may_seem_like_a_battle_of_wits/

    When atheists argue against theists on religion, their primary tactic involves citing logical inconsistencies with religion while promoting the idea that morality can exist as a stand alone product without a religious foundation. We attempt to make religious people see our point of view by offering irrefutable fallacies within religion and the bible.

    However, what we fail to realize is that dismissing religion is not a logical battle but rather an emotional one. People view religion not as a mental abstraction, but rather as a personal and emotional bond that inseparably links them, their family, their friends, their life and their reality with god. 

    It is best summed up in a quote from the article:

    "It is strange how religion gives you a way to reject the reality of death - which I guess does help to 'ease your suffering', that you "know they went to a better place" - but it also prevents proper mourning. When someone you love dies, and they tell you on their death bed that they will see you one day in heaven, you are more prepared for them to "die" because you know they aren't really "dead".

    To reject heaven and accept atheism - is not merely about science, facts, beliefs, etc - it is about accepting the reality of all those who have died - being really dead. It is accepting the same reality about everyone you love NOW one day being - really dead. It is accepting the same reality about YOU one day.

    The older you are, the more dear loved ones have passed away, the harder it will be to reject the notions of religion. To reject religion requires the re-mourning of everyone who you love who has died."


    What are your thoughts on the article? (Go read it already!)

Yosho

Weblog Archives

Don't worry - your calendar is here… to see it in action just click "Save" above and refresh the page.