Warning: may contain rambling.
Thing 1: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a.RLIhVF4ebk&refer=homeCitigroup is planning on laying off 52,000 employees in one year.
What on earth is Citigroup doing with 52,000 people that it doesn't need?
Also, how does a business grow to the size of Citigroup, with 352,000 employees? If you pick up and move everyone in the company, you could take over more than half of Boston proper. What?
What do 352,000 Citigroup employees do all day long?
GM tips the scales at 324,000 employees. Ford, 99,000ish.
...what?
I can't... I can't fathom that many people. I don't understand. You can't fit your company into a stadium. As a single company the size of GM, you have the capacity to burn $1.15 BILLION (
http://industry.bnet.com/auto/1000354/gm-must-slow-cash-burn-to-last-past-february/) a month if you're not selling enough product.
What?
How do you build a town around a company? How do you make your entire town dependent on the commercial success of one company? What the hell happens to these towns when companies fail? What happens to those people? Is this ok? Are there morals that encompass this?
Let's say a company isn't selling a product the market demands, and has demonstrated a complete inability to respond to market pressures. If you were to let that company fail, you'd put 324,000 out of a job (not entirely true with bankruptcies, I know, but let's argue extremes). What? Entire towns are built around this company. Towns. The places people live. You can destroy entire population centers with individual business decisions.
What?
I feel like I quantitatively understand the numerical facts about these companies, but I don't have the capacity to qualitatively understand how big these companies are. How do you get that big? Why on earth would you want to get that big? At what size does the company take on a life of its own? When does it start growing as a result of emergent behavior among groups of people, and not as a result of conscious decisions by specific individuals? Who the hell wants to run a company that big? What on earth do they do all day long?
I continue to be confused. This will probably continue for some time. In which case.. on to Thing 2!
Thing 2: http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN1934681720081119A girl lives for 118 days
without a heart. Her blood was circulated by two surgically-installed mechanical pumps. There was no organic heart in her body. It was not there. Gone.
I... don't know how to process this, other than by throwing my hands up and awaiting the singularity.
- - - - -
In other news, I'm roadtripping to Pittsburgh tomorrow. What? I have once again managed to take myself completely by surprise with plans that have been in the works for weeks.
I blame this surprise on my one-track, tuna-addled mind.
Damn. Why does working this hard on one project feel so good, yet have such terrible ramifications (other examples - not coming home before 11 PM for the past two weeks, never going out dancing, never hanging out with non-Olin friends...)? I pour most of my energy into my work, and the resulting work is really good, and I'm thus persuaded to pour more of my energy into my work, because it feels even better...
Positive feedback loops abound.
So, what is the balance, and how do I get there? More importantly, The emotional center of my mind is screaming about my life (life: sum total that should consist of more than work and sleep) being unbalanced because of this project. My logical brain processes this screaming, and agrees that I'm unbalanced. Yet, my actions don't change. Resulting unanimous conclusion from both sides: what we have here is addiction.
There are rationalizations to be made about the amount of energy required by my position as project manager in a tough situation, the tight deadline requiring more effort to meet than normal, intricate and extensive design work being necessary, etc. etc.
Rationalizations are logical shields for emotional decisions. I want to do what I am doing. By and large, I feel more good as a result of this project than I feel bad. If the opposite were true, I'd have one hell of a time getting myself to work on it.
(Aside, historical relevancy: I've been raised on ridiculous projects with even more ridiculous timelines. It started in the 6-weeks-to-build-a-robot FIRST competition, expressed itself violently as 24-hour design challenges, continued in 2-day-snake robotics labs, morphed into 3-month-ornithopter summer jobs, made its way to some extent to get-it-right-before-we-go-to-a-demo Boston Dynamics, and is now manifesting itself here in 3-month-tuna. Extraordinarily challenging, high-intensity projects have, to some extent, become an addiction in and of themselves).
- - -
ADDENDUM, 8:15 PM: Is this related to procrastination somehow? Do I use the not-much-time-left high to get boring stuff done?
- - -
Hmm.
I think I'm done with this post. There may be another today, if I can get my thoughts together in a not-quite-as-rambling manner.