30 ms·
No, it's not ridiculous. If building a bridge were the context, and someone built a piece that would collapse the bridge, I'd fully expect any foreman to say "
by pivnicek 13y ago
No, it's not ridiculous. If building a bridge were the context, and someone built a piece that would collapse the bridge, I'd fully expect any foreman to say "What the fuck is that?" "That is shit".
And I'd fully expect any worker to say "Yeah, damn, you're right, that was stupid. Cheers, I'll fix that"
People didn't start building stuff in the digital era., It's the same principles.
I hope to hell all crap gets called out, otherwise we're in a position where the bridge builders "meant well", and I wouldn't want to cross a river over such a bridge.
- Vornir 13y agoYou still haven't proved it's more efficient, here for example is a study[0] showing that self-blame is counter-productive. Also, your example is actually a good example of why this technique is not only inefficient, but morally and ethically wrong, because if a single worker can destroy a bridge, then there is a couple of engineers that didn't do their jobs correctly. [0] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886910000474?np=y https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019188691...
- tjr 13y agoMy grandfather supervised the construction of bridges. I cannot imagine him using such words, though he also would not have knowingly allowed faulty workmanship to be done.