jbrains

Good news, relatively speaking.

I've been where you are. Most important: don't let yourself start to take responsibility for managerial decisions. If they want you to stand in the corner on your head and cluck like a chicken, it's their money. 🤷 Don't let that change how you see yourself as a programmer.

And roll your eyes in private.

Is this a problem for you or merely annoying? I mean the difference between you being blamed for their poor results and you merely being inconvenienced by doing extra work.

You might need to train yourself to accept the situation as it is and hope for someone in authority to make things better. It's not easy, but this might be a good chance for you to build that skill. 🤷

Can you talk openly with your manager about this situation? Would it be helpful to you to propose to your manager that you help that group? Maybe your manager would appreciate your attempt at leadership.

Good luck.

You don't have to commit to any one thing in this life. I'm doing very little at age 51 that I was doing at age 27.

I also wasn't doing what I truly wanted to do most in life until my 40s.

I don't remember what LibreOffice calls it, but there is an option to choose which dates are the starting points for counting, so that 0 corresponds to different dates for reasons of compatibility with other spreadsheet systems. Yours is not set to what you're expecting.

One of the options is 4 years 1 day later than the LibreOffice standard, which explains why those dates are off by that much.

There is a setting per workbook and possibly a global setting that would affect all new workbooks until you change it.

Search the web for something like "1904 date option LibreOffice Calc" and you'll find out the details. Good luck.

The reference date (the date that 0 represents) is not set as you expect. This happened to me when I imported Numbers files into LibreOffice Calc and is the reason I know about this at all.

https://www.ionos.ca/digitalguide/domains/domain-administration/punycode/

https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/133403-we-should-do-away-with-the-absolutely-specious-notion-that

If you have social anxiety, then why are you blaming women for being difficult to talk to or flirt with?

Women didn't get me until I grew into my 20s. For some of us, it takes longer, and it feels terrible in the meantime. Peace.

The cumulative pedantry is almost all the fun.

And it should be displaceraptor, dropping the last syllable, otherwise the quotient would be velocityraptor.

Thank you for the example. Indeed, the context did not make that clear.

That makes me wonder what he thought he was saying. I infer something like "very few". Or he genuinely though he had no bullets left and was wrong. I'd say that second case seems highly unlikely, but it wouldn't totally shock me.

I wonder whether the word is the issue or the speaker's intent: if the speaker insists in exaggerating, then no word they use is going to convey that they aren't exaggerating. I wouldn't think them likely to use any word to convey that they aren't exaggerating, because they are. I think of it like a person bent on sarcasm: you simply need to detect it somehow, then filter every word accordingly.

That wouldn't make the word "literally" literally ruined, but might instead merely indicate that we can't rely on it as a safeword against exaggeration. 🤷

I don't remember the last time someone used the word "literally" and I couldn't tell whether they meant it in the classic sense or in the modern sense, either as an intensifier or as filler. If you do, then I'd genuinely like to learn about that, because I don't think I could imagine such a scenario. I might lack imagination or I might not be around people who use the word often enough to judge.

I genuinely believe you overstate the matter, especially in claiming that the word had been robbed of its previous meaning. I still use the word exclusively with its classic meaning and I never see confused faces when I do. 🤷 (That's not any kind of proof, but merely a reason for my current position on this.)