Employees of a taser company getting tased doesn't seem that extreme, as long as you COULD opt out.
My old employer asked men in the office to take a photo wearing red high heels as a photo of solidarity to idk.. #metoo or feminism or who knows. I imagine the men in that office felt more pressure to be in that photo than people felt pressure to get tased.
And if it was up to me, I'd rather get tased than have a photo of me in high heels. Luckily I was gone by then. But I've seen the photo.
The point of the story is the pressure. "Opting out" is not an option if the company's culture made it clear that everyone was expected to do it.
The comparison to being asked to wear high heels (which is stupid) is distasteful: tasers kill people, and Axon is well aware that their product, in particular, has deaths attributable to it[1]. You might feel stupid in high heels, but they won't kill you.
I don't think the GP was at significant risk of dying from a fall in stationary heels; this is a distraction.
> The alternatives to tazing someone are pepper spray (has it's own deaths caused by it) or 9mm which is quite a bit more fatal.
The alternative is none of the above. American police use "less-lethal" weaponry to a far greater extent (and with far more ease) than comparable countries.
Talking about deaths is silly without talking about the rate of those deaths. That's the point of the high heels kill people.
If you remove LTL options, then yes American cops will do what UK cops do and use unarmed strikes. That means repeatedly striking, hitting and keeping in a stress position a suspect.
Striking people kills them. It kills them at a much, much, much higher rate than pepper spray or tasers.
You forgot batons. Has batons really gone out of fashion that much?
In theory it is good to have a middle ground between batons and pistols for handling e.g. knife wielding mental patients or whatever. But I don't think these kind of special weapons like papper spray or tazers should be given to anything but designated units specialized in handling insane people. Ordinary cops are just too stupid to be given ways to "safely" hurt people. They will use it too much.
Batons *really* kill people next to pepper spray and tasers. It's a steel rod (or wooden if very old).
One of the selling points of a baton is that it can be used lethally. If you start engaging with a baton and the suspect pulls a knife, you still use the baton but use different strike areas.
Pepper spray causes irritation and is corrected with water. Deaths usually occur in someone with compromised airways or who has heart issues. Tasers leave no impacts and cause deaths in those with heart issues.
Batons break bones and disable joints. The old school method was to break the suspects collarbone which makes raising the arm very hard - but that is difficult for a smaller person so now they use disabling joint strikes. The side of the knee cap is a nice prime spot.
I think there is a difference between getting shocked by the police, and willingly in a controlled environment.
The police doesn't know or doesn't care about the conditions of their victims, who are often on drugs. In the article, the victim was "really, really, really bad” and wanted to go to the hospital before getting tased.
Here, hopefully, the employees are most likely asked for medical conditions and they are not on drugs. They are shot from the back (probably safer than on the front), there are people next to them to cover their fall and they are wearing safety goggles. They are also not shocked repeatedly. These are ideal conditions that almost never happen in real life, and I guess that although there is a risk, it is very safe.
And high heels have definitely caused (often minor) injuries to the wearer, like from falls. And maybe a death or two, who knows.
I am no saying that getting tased is good, just that in these controlled conditions, you most likely won't die. It fact, it may be less dangerous than alcohol fueled "after work" parties, which is also the kind of thing where "opting out" may be difficult in some companies (which may also include Axon).
Unfortunately there aren’t any government statistics specifically on high heel mortality, but tripping and falling is certainly a very common cause of death and no doubt high heels contribute to it.
The point wasn't that I could die in high heels. The point is that I dislike the idea vehemently, but I'm sure there was massive pressure inside the company to not be the one guy that doesn't want to take part in the red high heel pro women photo.
> I'd rather get tased than have a photo of me in high heels.
When it comes to being forced to do something for a job I’d personally rather be compelled to do the thing that creates evidence that I can later rely on in a lawsuit than get shot with the excruciating pain gun.
I find that the demand for "loyalty" is even more problematic than the tasing or tattooing, to be honest. When anyone stresses "loyalty", especially to such a degree, that's an indication that something is very, very wrong with that person or group of people.
These are cults that provide a paycheck. Don't work for cults. Report them when they break the law (or seek counsel when it's a civil/contractual infraction).
"Free" with many serious conditions. If you have to see a doctor every week for a chronic medical condition, you are very much not free to leave whenever you want.
I tend to agree; explicit demands for "loyalty" is usually a strong proxy for a mobster mentality.
That being said, I know more than a few companies that "encourage" (or at least explicitly approve of) employees getting tattoos, and it's always struck me as a significant red flag. It's usually tied to some kind of expression of loyalty.
It's not significantly different imo than some of the ideological stuff workplaces are pushing these days (diversity equity, blabla). Any work that has to be something more than work is a problem imo.
> You, your friends, and your loved ones may end up fired AND, victims of a social media mob-lynching
When has this actually happened as a result of not attending some HR nonsense? And even if it did, getting fired seems like a much larger problem than being bad-mouthed online.
The tattoo thing really shocked me but I've seen people with Nike logo tattoos, of their own free will, choosing (unpaid!) for their body to be an advertisment for a company. So I guess so what, if you're sufficiently stupid or ovine.
I suppose it wasn't the 9/11 WTC Nike "Just Do It" logo I saw back end 2001 which was used to protest War in Afghanistan (and later Iraq) back in the days. That logo as tattoo would surely lead to conflicts back then.
Every tattoo is going to lead to regret at some point. Or situations where your tattoo is inappropriate (nevermind the hypothetical example above, think about wearing wrong brand in areas of LA). There's probably even a name for these phenomenons.
The crown though is sportsmen. Sportsmen with an abundance of tattoos. While tattoos make you more warm, requiring more sweat elsewhere, bottom line leading to higher body temperatures. I've seen it in football (which Americans call soccer), I think it was David Beckham who set the trend here (regarding the full body tattoos).
Oh it was (I wasn't able to find the picture, might retry in weekend). The person I knew who used that avatar was a friendly guy but... some people just really hate the USA being world police. You know, Chomsky followers, for example.
I'd say in 2023 it has been pointed out by world events the USA is the best world police. Because the alternatives are far more nefarious.
Anyway, tasteless, sure I can follow that. Is it going to lead to physical aggression? Very possibly. There's other examples, too. People getting swastikas having to hide them at work or later renouncing such politics. Relationships breaking up, painful reminder. Military people getting tortured over having certain tattoos (happening in a current military conflict)
And to the person claiming I'm a bot, you should read the news guidelines about making such statement. If you want you can use some tooling for such to give your comment merit but before you put time into that see my other comments.
> While tattoos make you more warm, requiring more sweat elsewhere, bottom line leading to higher body temperatures
appeared a very stupid comment indeed. However I am wrong and will always admit it and learn from it, so do you have any links to show that tatts, once healed, affect body temperature detectably?
(edit: looks like I am wrong. I take it all back with fulsome apologies).
> I suppose it wasn't the 9/11 WTC Nike "Just Do It" logo I saw back end 2001 which was used to protest War in Afghanistan (and later Iraq) back in the days. That logo as tattoo would surely lead to conflicts back then.
I have no knowledge of this, can you give me a few pointers please?
> Every tattoo is going to lead to regret at some point
wat the ever utter fuck? 100% crap.
> While tattoos make you more warm, requiring more sweat elsewhere, bottom line leading to higher body temperatures
(criticusm removed. Study quoted elsewhere on this thread looks plausible and credible).
> Every tattoo is going to lead to regret at some point.
This is certainly untrue. People get tattoos for all sorts of reasons, and those that get them after due thought and because they have real meaning to them don't tend to regret them at all.
That said, I have seen people get tattoos on a lark, and the tattoos they get don't really mean anything to them. Those people are more likely to regret them later -- but even then, they often don't.
Guaranteed is untrue, I agree, that statement was a tad too bold (too bad its tattooed on HN without being able to nuance it).
In a lifetime? Potentially enough yes to not opt for such. Tho there is different size and place, I'd say the main issue is with ones which end up practically 24/7 public.
If I look at my own life, then in every situation a t-shirt or sweater with statement or brand would make more sense than a tattoo. These can translate a meaning just as well, but allow to switch based on social setting. Which very much changes throughout life.
Religious, political, romantic, hobby, passion statements are fluctuating within a person's life. Just in different likeliness. Even when one believes they don't.
So Alice thinks Bob is the one, and Alice gets a Bob tattoo. After all they're 12,5 years together, must be enough for forever? And she had an Aum from her youth, and a logo of her favorite band, Nirvana. 10 years later, Bob dies in a car accident. Alice meets Charlie, a Catholic. Alice eventually wants to replace her Bob tattoo with a Charlie tattoo, and resents her Hindu passion. She refined her music taste. Charlie loses Catholicism as Alice isn't Catholic. However, since he worn a cross necklace, no tattoo has to be removed. Regarding Nirvana? Ah, turns out Kurt Cobain did some #metoo stuff which got finally uncovered. There goes your idol. So yes even things seemingly non-volatile and stable can change. And thoughout a lifetime, its very likely they will.
Same with biohacking NFC chips under your skin. In 10 years vulnerabilities are found in the chips or the keypair doesn't fit anymore or they figure they can be compelled to authenticate (robbery, law enforcement).
My wife has a tattoo and had a piercing, I had a piercing. We both regret the piercings (hers was nipple, mine was eyebrow) cause of complications. The tattoo seems more silly to me though, though only visible to public in swimming pool.
You see, we're in such a quick pace and globalization has succeeded there isn't much we can take for granted in our lifetimes.
The job tattoo thingy is just an example. And since I have needle phobia I'd say no thank you with that as reasoning first and foremost. (The observant reader might notice a person with needle phobia having received a piercing in past. I did not realize I would need anesthesia via a syringe; I thought some kind of patch on skin would've been suffice. I didn't look into it enough. So I panicked and literally ran out of the shop and would not get my money back, so I bitten the bullet. Don't think I had to pay extra so I suppose that was nice. The severity can also differ a bit and for medical related I've used oxazepam with success recently. Tho I recognize its addictive nature and hence would prefer not to regularly use such.)
> In a lifetime? Potentially enough yes to not opt for such.
Maybe? I'm an older guy and know a lot of people my age with tattoos. Very few of them regret their art, even when their art isn't as meaningful as it once was. It still serves as a totem of a certain time in their life.
But it's also true that lots of people regret tattoos. I do think that people younger than 30 or so should avoid them.
A friend of mine is a tattoo artist, and he has a lot of advice for how to avoid regretting one later, because his specialty is doing cover-up tattoos for people who later regret one they got. The most common reason for regretting a tattoo is that the tattoo they got was done or was placed very poorly and didn't get any better with age.
> Alice thinks Bob is the one, and Alice gets a Bob tattoo
This is touches on a piece of advice he has: never get a name tattooed on you. Not your lover, not your spouse, not your parents, not even your children (he has a couple of stories where children have died young and the tattoo their parent had became a constant reminder of grief).
He considered this so important that he would personally refuse to do such tattoos at all.
So it all depends. People who take seriously the fact that tattoos are forever tend to be fine with the ones they do get, even over a lifetime.
I think I get this. Some people just aren't tattoo people and don't understand the motivations of people with tattoos. I can relate to that. Which is why if I'm being smart, I'd be cautious trying to talk about tattoos.
Commenter is probably just a fish out of water, no judgement.
> James defended Axon’s culture, describing it as “a collaborative environment of mission-driven individuals who join forces to deliver an extraordinarily profound impact on society.”
Meta: ChatGPT is excellent at generating blanket corp speech. It’s quite fun to prompt for passive aggressive statements in that style.
Axon hosted an AI meeting in Seattle recently. Their office was a bit...much. There were these weird spaceship-looking doors that opened to the office itself and the theme was very much "you are in a scifi space ship". I didn't get any vibes that this would be a place wherein you'd have to be tased, though. Bad if true.
I've been to the Seattle office you described for interviews and to the Scottsdale HQ, which is a normal very modern but not bespoke office building; it's in Scottsdale where they had the display of tasers and the offer to be tased if you wanted to see how it was.
(I was just interviewing, and the people seemed quite normal, but i hadn't worked on what i was being interviewed for, and screwed up a puzzle, so never joined.)
So Axon isn’t my cup of tea for a lot of reasons but if I were building tasers, I’d definitely want to know what I was doing to my er customers. I’d absolutely get myself tased during the interview.
I'm mildly ok with this. The cops seem to use these pretty willy nilly for how painful and dangerous they seem. There's a kind of karmic balance in executives suffering the same ordeal that they unleashed into the world. Appeals to my sense of balance.
I think the issue is less execs getting tased, but more peer pressuring any and all employees to "ride the lightning" and get tased, lest they be shunned as not being "all in". (similar for getting company logo tattoos as the article mentions.)
Context matters, though. Being punched hard in the face in your martial arts class is very different than being sucker punched in public by a stranger. Cops tasering each other on gym mats are definitely not having the experience a citizen would.
Do you mean the inventors of "Excited Delirium" who paid a bunch of doctors to make up a disease that justifies the use of their product might not be on the up-and-up? ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
Ah crap, my HN filters are slipping. What I meant was, "oh gosh, bad apples, the truth is in the middle, etc".
I'm not sure why this is at the bottom. There's sarcasm and exaggeration, but it's a very legitimate point. [edit: ok, no longer gray and at the bottom.]
Read through the wikipedia page[0] on how it's not recognized by most medical associations.
> a specialist in investigating deaths in custody, describes excited delirium as "a boutique kind of diagnosis created, unfortunately, by many of my forensic pathology colleagues specifically for persons dying when being restrained by law enforcement."
Or a deeper Reuters investigation[1] on how closely the diagnosis and acceptance of the "condition" is tied to police and taser manufacturers, Axon specifically. Cmd+F'ing "Mash" will jump you to the parts where they're paying the medical examiner who also happens to diagnose these deaths as exited delirium.
> Or a deeper Reuters investigation[1] on how closely the diagnosis and acceptance of the "condition" is tied to police and taser manufacturers, Axon specifically. Cmd+F'ing "Mash" will jump you to the parts where they're paying the medical examiner who also happens to diagnose these deaths as exited delirium.
I think you may have misread that part. Mash isn't and wasn't the medical examiner ever that I can find online. As best I can piece this together from that article and some Googling, Taser hired Mash as an expert witness in 8 trials for a total of ~$24,000 (included just because I believe that's in the normal range for that kind of testimony).
Then Mark Shuman, who is an Associate Medical Examiner, sent brain tissue samples to Mash's lab without knowing that Taser had previously paid her for testimony.
That's not to say the situation or diagnosis is okay, just that I think this is accusing them of something that didn't happen. There's plenty of crap they have done to criticize them for.
That Wikipedia article would be funny if the situation wasn't so tragic. It's utterly unintelligible. A condition with no proposed cause, which causes death with no specified mechanism, and a list of symptoms that matches everything from "stressed out about being arrested", to a psychotic break, to "actively overdosing on PCP". How they ever manage to convince a jury that the cardiac arrest is from some vague syndrome and not the police having basically put nipple clamps connected to mains voltage on them is beyond me.
No worries! The writing of the article does tend to read that way since they don't introduce her and then immediately start talking about Medical Examiners. That's how I read it at first too.
I only found out because I was trying to see if she got fired. It's one thing to find a random doctor who will say what you want, it's another thing entirely to have bought out the Medical Examiner.
I guess it's nice that employees of the company felt so confident in their product's safety that they're willing to get tased? Or it would have been if they'd done so voluntarily.
Not to mention the bizarre comic book that the CEO paid for that was basically an insane dystopian vision of schools filled with taser drones and replacing warfare with kidnap-bots...
> “Most of our board and many of our most senior executives have chosen not to experience Taser devices.”
I can understand younger employees—or maybe those who give a shit about what they’re inflicting on others—being curious about “experiencing Taser devices”.
Making it a cult camaraderie ceremony seems ill-advised.
"Less well-known is the all-in corporate culture at Axon, which has tested employees’ commitment and fealty in unusual ways
Shawn Gorman, a lawyer who worked at Axon until 2019, said the company had a high-pressure culture of loyalty, unlike anything he has seen in nearly two decades of practice. “It was truly toxic,” he said."
Axon wants to expand their Arizona campus with residential housing for their employees ... after reading this it sounds like a recipe for disaster.
Well, that strange compelled stock gambling program (has the SEC seen that?) is already a little like getting paid in scrip for the company store. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_store
But this is an opportunity to look at one's own company, and what stereotypical fratbro influences it's picked up. Commonplace ones in tech: hazing rituals for negging pledges, bro/class culture fit screening, demonstrations of loyalty, questionable organizational behavior with everyone complicit...
Preface this with I’ve been at axon for a few years now. Feel free to skip reading my opinion.
I don’t subscribe to the whole being loyal to a company we are a team stuff that many tech companies seem to have (you can’t always expect the same “loyalty” back once times are hard or stock price needs some help). I can say that in the time I’ve been here I’ve never seen any of this and I’ve been at corporate h.q. for much of that time (remote now). I haven’t been tased. Honestly I kind of wanted to and when I joined some folks I worked with said it was always an option if I wanted to. I kind of like the idea in some ways - we are selling these products to the police and others to use on people - it makes some sense to me to understand just what the use of our products entail in the instance to get the gravity of the situation etc.
All that being said if folks have felt this way that’s no good to me and I guess I can’t really speak to other teams in the company. I’m farther in my career and a middle age white guy, it’s always possible that I don’t experience a feeling of pressure, regardless of whether it is intended to be there, the same way younger or more junior folks might.
The company you work for paid doctors to make up a fake medical state to justify the use of their products in police brutality. Maybe you should not work there.
> I kind of like the idea in some ways - we are selling these products to the police and others to use on people - it makes some sense to me to understand just what the use of our products entail in the instance to get the gravity of the situation etc.
FWIW, police training involves recruits getting maced and tased themselves for this very reason.
Maybe it's not entirely bad that employees are subjected to effects of their products this way. Police officers should also be tased as a part of weapon training, just to understand how the device works
Surprised no one has mentioned this but there is actually a documentary called "All Light, Everywhere" with a pretty extensive tour of the Axon offices. I believe it is available to stream on Hulu (in the US at least).
I don't know what is with companies who pretend that the work environment should be more than an exchange of skills for compensation. Even ignoring these kinds of egregious examples, I find the rah-rah-rah of companies where people are excited to hear the CEO speak to be creepy and weird.
> pretend that the work environment should be more than an exchange of skills for compensation.
> rah-rah-rah of companies where people are excited to hear the CEO speak to be creepy and weird.
I think these two examples are actually pretty different. You could think highly of the mission and attach a high amount of value to your work without the CEO being a cult figure. I've been in an environment where I had the former but not the latter.
Hm, I guess I wasn't specific enough - you're right that you could just be excited by the mission of the company and that seems healthy and cool. It's the borderline worship and the cheering (to be fair I think this might be an American cultural thing) that seems off.
Or maybe it's my gut feeling that many of the people involved in aforementioned rah-rah-rah behavior are just putting on their "work persona" face a little bit too enthusiastically, which itself feels a bit sus to me.
80 comments
[ 3.6 ms ] story [ 135 ms ] thread[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigma_Chi#Controversies_and_me...
My old employer asked men in the office to take a photo wearing red high heels as a photo of solidarity to idk.. #metoo or feminism or who knows. I imagine the men in that office felt more pressure to be in that photo than people felt pressure to get tased. And if it was up to me, I'd rather get tased than have a photo of me in high heels. Luckily I was gone by then. But I've seen the photo.
The comparison to being asked to wear high heels (which is stupid) is distasteful: tasers kill people, and Axon is well aware that their product, in particular, has deaths attributable to it[1]. You might feel stupid in high heels, but they won't kill you.
[1]: https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-tase...
Though if your argument is that your less-than-lethal product is safe.. testing it on yourself seems pretty on point.
The alternatives to tazing someone are pepper spray (has it's own deaths caused by it) or 9mm which is quite a bit more fatal.
> The alternatives to tazing someone are pepper spray (has it's own deaths caused by it) or 9mm which is quite a bit more fatal.
The alternative is none of the above. American police use "less-lethal" weaponry to a far greater extent (and with far more ease) than comparable countries.
If you remove LTL options, then yes American cops will do what UK cops do and use unarmed strikes. That means repeatedly striking, hitting and keeping in a stress position a suspect.
Striking people kills them. It kills them at a much, much, much higher rate than pepper spray or tasers.
In theory it is good to have a middle ground between batons and pistols for handling e.g. knife wielding mental patients or whatever. But I don't think these kind of special weapons like papper spray or tazers should be given to anything but designated units specialized in handling insane people. Ordinary cops are just too stupid to be given ways to "safely" hurt people. They will use it too much.
One of the selling points of a baton is that it can be used lethally. If you start engaging with a baton and the suspect pulls a knife, you still use the baton but use different strike areas.
Pepper spray causes irritation and is corrected with water. Deaths usually occur in someone with compromised airways or who has heart issues. Tasers leave no impacts and cause deaths in those with heart issues.
Batons break bones and disable joints. The old school method was to break the suspects collarbone which makes raising the arm very hard - but that is difficult for a smaller person so now they use disabling joint strikes. The side of the knee cap is a nice prime spot.
The police doesn't know or doesn't care about the conditions of their victims, who are often on drugs. In the article, the victim was "really, really, really bad” and wanted to go to the hospital before getting tased.
Here, hopefully, the employees are most likely asked for medical conditions and they are not on drugs. They are shot from the back (probably safer than on the front), there are people next to them to cover their fall and they are wearing safety goggles. They are also not shocked repeatedly. These are ideal conditions that almost never happen in real life, and I guess that although there is a risk, it is very safe.
And high heels have definitely caused (often minor) injuries to the wearer, like from falls. And maybe a death or two, who knows.
I am no saying that getting tased is good, just that in these controlled conditions, you most likely won't die. It fact, it may be less dangerous than alcohol fueled "after work" parties, which is also the kind of thing where "opting out" may be difficult in some companies (which may also include Axon).
The safest thing is to not get tased, there is no risk of death from that. It seems ridiculous to take on a risk of death for no benefit.
When it comes to being forced to do something for a job I’d personally rather be compelled to do the thing that creates evidence that I can later rely on in a lawsuit than get shot with the excruciating pain gun.
That being said, I know more than a few companies that "encourage" (or at least explicitly approve of) employees getting tattoos, and it's always struck me as a significant red flag. It's usually tied to some kind of expression of loyalty.
Compare that you the very real request to attend a HR struggle session, or sign an expression of support of X cause in a letter
Now refuse. You, your friends, and your loved ones may end up fired AND, victims of a social media mob-lynching
As you can see, the downside is quite dramatic in 1 of the 2 scenarios. Tattoo is suddenly looking quite good!
When has this actually happened as a result of not attending some HR nonsense? And even if it did, getting fired seems like a much larger problem than being bad-mouthed online.
I’d argue the opposite: if I’m fired, I can get another job. If I’m bad-mouthed online, that can affect all future job prospects.
Every tattoo is going to lead to regret at some point. Or situations where your tattoo is inappropriate (nevermind the hypothetical example above, think about wearing wrong brand in areas of LA). There's probably even a name for these phenomenons.
The crown though is sportsmen. Sportsmen with an abundance of tattoos. While tattoos make you more warm, requiring more sweat elsewhere, bottom line leading to higher body temperatures. I've seen it in football (which Americans call soccer), I think it was David Beckham who set the trend here (regarding the full body tattoos).
I've never heard of this before. Isn't it a bit... tasteless, at the least, to get a tattoo of a wing in relation to 9/11?
I'd say in 2023 it has been pointed out by world events the USA is the best world police. Because the alternatives are far more nefarious.
Anyway, tasteless, sure I can follow that. Is it going to lead to physical aggression? Very possibly. There's other examples, too. People getting swastikas having to hide them at work or later renouncing such politics. Relationships breaking up, painful reminder. Military people getting tortured over having certain tattoos (happening in a current military conflict)
And to the person claiming I'm a bot, you should read the news guidelines about making such statement. If you want you can use some tooling for such to give your comment merit but before you put time into that see my other comments.
> While tattoos make you more warm, requiring more sweat elsewhere, bottom line leading to higher body temperatures
appeared a very stupid comment indeed. However I am wrong and will always admit it and learn from it, so do you have any links to show that tatts, once healed, affect body temperature detectably?
(edit: looks like I am wrong. I take it all back with fulsome apologies).
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32881627/
To be fair, this comment and your comment before it both read a bit nonsensically.
I have no knowledge of this, can you give me a few pointers please?
> Every tattoo is going to lead to regret at some point
wat the ever utter fuck? 100% crap.
> While tattoos make you more warm, requiring more sweat elsewhere, bottom line leading to higher body temperatures
(criticusm removed. Study quoted elsewhere on this thread looks plausible and credible).
This is certainly untrue. People get tattoos for all sorts of reasons, and those that get them after due thought and because they have real meaning to them don't tend to regret them at all.
That said, I have seen people get tattoos on a lark, and the tattoos they get don't really mean anything to them. Those people are more likely to regret them later -- but even then, they often don't.
In a lifetime? Potentially enough yes to not opt for such. Tho there is different size and place, I'd say the main issue is with ones which end up practically 24/7 public.
If I look at my own life, then in every situation a t-shirt or sweater with statement or brand would make more sense than a tattoo. These can translate a meaning just as well, but allow to switch based on social setting. Which very much changes throughout life.
Religious, political, romantic, hobby, passion statements are fluctuating within a person's life. Just in different likeliness. Even when one believes they don't.
So Alice thinks Bob is the one, and Alice gets a Bob tattoo. After all they're 12,5 years together, must be enough for forever? And she had an Aum from her youth, and a logo of her favorite band, Nirvana. 10 years later, Bob dies in a car accident. Alice meets Charlie, a Catholic. Alice eventually wants to replace her Bob tattoo with a Charlie tattoo, and resents her Hindu passion. She refined her music taste. Charlie loses Catholicism as Alice isn't Catholic. However, since he worn a cross necklace, no tattoo has to be removed. Regarding Nirvana? Ah, turns out Kurt Cobain did some #metoo stuff which got finally uncovered. There goes your idol. So yes even things seemingly non-volatile and stable can change. And thoughout a lifetime, its very likely they will.
Same with biohacking NFC chips under your skin. In 10 years vulnerabilities are found in the chips or the keypair doesn't fit anymore or they figure they can be compelled to authenticate (robbery, law enforcement).
My wife has a tattoo and had a piercing, I had a piercing. We both regret the piercings (hers was nipple, mine was eyebrow) cause of complications. The tattoo seems more silly to me though, though only visible to public in swimming pool.
You see, we're in such a quick pace and globalization has succeeded there isn't much we can take for granted in our lifetimes.
The job tattoo thingy is just an example. And since I have needle phobia I'd say no thank you with that as reasoning first and foremost. (The observant reader might notice a person with needle phobia having received a piercing in past. I did not realize I would need anesthesia via a syringe; I thought some kind of patch on skin would've been suffice. I didn't look into it enough. So I panicked and literally ran out of the shop and would not get my money back, so I bitten the bullet. Don't think I had to pay extra so I suppose that was nice. The severity can also differ a bit and for medical related I've used oxazepam with success recently. Tho I recognize its addictive nature and hence would prefer not to regularly use such.)
Maybe? I'm an older guy and know a lot of people my age with tattoos. Very few of them regret their art, even when their art isn't as meaningful as it once was. It still serves as a totem of a certain time in their life.
But it's also true that lots of people regret tattoos. I do think that people younger than 30 or so should avoid them.
A friend of mine is a tattoo artist, and he has a lot of advice for how to avoid regretting one later, because his specialty is doing cover-up tattoos for people who later regret one they got. The most common reason for regretting a tattoo is that the tattoo they got was done or was placed very poorly and didn't get any better with age.
> Alice thinks Bob is the one, and Alice gets a Bob tattoo
This is touches on a piece of advice he has: never get a name tattooed on you. Not your lover, not your spouse, not your parents, not even your children (he has a couple of stories where children have died young and the tattoo their parent had became a constant reminder of grief).
He considered this so important that he would personally refuse to do such tattoos at all.
So it all depends. People who take seriously the fact that tattoos are forever tend to be fine with the ones they do get, even over a lifetime.
What odd, and false, blanket generalizations.
Commenter is probably just a fish out of water, no judgement.
Meta: ChatGPT is excellent at generating blanket corp speech. It’s quite fun to prompt for passive aggressive statements in that style.
(I was just interviewing, and the people seemed quite normal, but i hadn't worked on what i was being interviewed for, and screwed up a puzzle, so never joined.)
Ah crap, my HN filters are slipping. What I meant was, "oh gosh, bad apples, the truth is in the middle, etc".
Read through the wikipedia page[0] on how it's not recognized by most medical associations.
> a specialist in investigating deaths in custody, describes excited delirium as "a boutique kind of diagnosis created, unfortunately, by many of my forensic pathology colleagues specifically for persons dying when being restrained by law enforcement."
Or a deeper Reuters investigation[1] on how closely the diagnosis and acceptance of the "condition" is tied to police and taser manufacturers, Axon specifically. Cmd+F'ing "Mash" will jump you to the parts where they're paying the medical examiner who also happens to diagnose these deaths as exited delirium.
0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excited_delirium#Lack_of_accep...
1: https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-tase...
I think you may have misread that part. Mash isn't and wasn't the medical examiner ever that I can find online. As best I can piece this together from that article and some Googling, Taser hired Mash as an expert witness in 8 trials for a total of ~$24,000 (included just because I believe that's in the normal range for that kind of testimony).
Then Mark Shuman, who is an Associate Medical Examiner, sent brain tissue samples to Mash's lab without knowing that Taser had previously paid her for testimony.
That's not to say the situation or diagnosis is okay, just that I think this is accusing them of something that didn't happen. There's plenty of crap they have done to criticize them for.
That Wikipedia article would be funny if the situation wasn't so tragic. It's utterly unintelligible. A condition with no proposed cause, which causes death with no specified mechanism, and a list of symptoms that matches everything from "stressed out about being arrested", to a psychotic break, to "actively overdosing on PCP". How they ever manage to convince a jury that the cardiac arrest is from some vague syndrome and not the police having basically put nipple clamps connected to mains voltage on them is beyond me.
I only found out because I was trying to see if she got fired. It's one thing to find a random doctor who will say what you want, it's another thing entirely to have bought out the Medical Examiner.
I can understand younger employees—or maybe those who give a shit about what they’re inflicting on others—being curious about “experiencing Taser devices”.
Making it a cult camaraderie ceremony seems ill-advised.
Shawn Gorman, a lawyer who worked at Axon until 2019, said the company had a high-pressure culture of loyalty, unlike anything he has seen in nearly two decades of practice. “It was truly toxic,” he said."
Axon wants to expand their Arizona campus with residential housing for their employees ... after reading this it sounds like a recipe for disaster.
https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/scottsdale/2023/0...
Real loyalty is saved for family and friends.
But this is an opportunity to look at one's own company, and what stereotypical fratbro influences it's picked up. Commonplace ones in tech: hazing rituals for negging pledges, bro/class culture fit screening, demonstrations of loyalty, questionable organizational behavior with everyone complicit...
I don’t subscribe to the whole being loyal to a company we are a team stuff that many tech companies seem to have (you can’t always expect the same “loyalty” back once times are hard or stock price needs some help). I can say that in the time I’ve been here I’ve never seen any of this and I’ve been at corporate h.q. for much of that time (remote now). I haven’t been tased. Honestly I kind of wanted to and when I joined some folks I worked with said it was always an option if I wanted to. I kind of like the idea in some ways - we are selling these products to the police and others to use on people - it makes some sense to me to understand just what the use of our products entail in the instance to get the gravity of the situation etc.
All that being said if folks have felt this way that’s no good to me and I guess I can’t really speak to other teams in the company. I’m farther in my career and a middle age white guy, it’s always possible that I don’t experience a feeling of pressure, regardless of whether it is intended to be there, the same way younger or more junior folks might.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excited_delirium#cite_note-Reu...
FWIW, police training involves recruits getting maced and tased themselves for this very reason.
> rah-rah-rah of companies where people are excited to hear the CEO speak to be creepy and weird.
I think these two examples are actually pretty different. You could think highly of the mission and attach a high amount of value to your work without the CEO being a cult figure. I've been in an environment where I had the former but not the latter.
Or maybe it's my gut feeling that many of the people involved in aforementioned rah-rah-rah behavior are just putting on their "work persona" face a little bit too enthusiastically, which itself feels a bit sus to me.