[fallenspec]

> OP's statement leads straight to "they're out to get me," which is absolutely not helpful, and it's absolutely an indicator of a difficult hire.

Not at all. If you've been out of work for a year and seeing your savings (if you have any) dwindle and vent on what is an internet comment sections, doesn't indicate how you are in person at all.

> If I'm interviewing someone and the person is demonstrating a victim narrative, that is a huge red flag.

You are ignoring the present situation entirely. Governments have put everyone's life on hold for well over a year now (we are in month 17). Statements from authorities have been contradictory, non-sensical, they have lied in some cases and some have broken their own lockdown rules (e.g. in the UK Matt Hancock which was in charge of public health IIRC was exposed as having an affair during COVID, which BTW was illegal under the lockdown rules).

So many people can see it for what it is. One rule for them and one rule for the plebs.

> Similarly, the inability to see shades of gray (e.g. "using MySQL is always utterly stupid, you should never use it in favor of Postgres") which OP demonstrates with their COVID statements, makes a person virtually non-employable in my book

You are reading far too much into comments around COVID due to your personal bias (which btw is obvious here). Because you disagree on a particular issue doesn't not indicate someone's thinking in a different field of expertise. e.g. there are many great scientists that believe very deeply in Religion. Which as a non-believer I would think would be at odds with one another.

I have personally found it very difficult to find a job during COVID as well. I am almost 40 now and it worries me that I might experience the same in the future.

[heurisko]

In addition to Matt Hancock, there was also the case of exemptions from quarantine for UEFA football VIPs. [1]

I think it's right the UK is returning to personal responsibility, especially as many of the rules haven't seemed to be science-based e.g. you must wear a mask entering a pub, but you are allowed to remove the mask while eating seated.

It's health-theatre, rather than virus prevention.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/football/2021/jun/18/vips-to-be-...

[fallenspec]

There were many notable people who were exposed as to exposing that we all should be lockdown while breaking the rules themselves. It is quite frustrating when I live in an area where almost everyone followed the rules.

Yes there is a quite an element to theatre to the whole thing, which makes sensible discussion about the issue impossible. Which I believe is somewhat by design.

[nate_meurer]

> Which I believe is somewhat by design.

That's a really interesting thought that had never occurred to me. Maybe somewhat akin to Steve Bannon's "flood the zone with shit" strategy.

[fallenspec]

There is a short by Adam Curtis called "Oh Dear". You may have seen it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcy8uLjRHPM

The basic takeaway is that you make it impossible for the average person to keep up the thread of events and they become apathetic to it. I've also watched Adam Curtis's "Hypernormalisation". It is well worth a watch.

[nate_meurer]

Fantastic, thank you.

[iodfuse]

>there are many great scientists that believe very deeply in Religion. Which as a non-believer I would think would be at odds with one another.

And you would be right, we definitely shouldn't trust religious people to do science, of all things.

[fallenspec]

The fact was that I wasn't right. They were doing decent work and their beliefs didn't affect their work.

A lot of non-believers (in the past I would have include myself in that list) seem to believe because they don't believe in a higher being that they are somehow more "rational". Nothing could be further from the truth. It took me a long time to realise that I wasn't being more rational than the faithful and I dogmatic about things that were simply quasi-religious. It took a lot of introspection and several times I had moments where my ideology hit reality hard and I spent several days dealing with cognitive dissonance and having to accept I was just wrong.

[pb7]

Believing in something that lacks any evidence is textbook irrationality. It is also at odds with science.

[umanwizard]

Indeed, but I think that was the point. It's entirely possible to hold irrational beliefs in one area without them affecting your work in another area.

Whether you think it's at odds or not, in practice many great scientists have been devoutly religious. For example Newton.