Via Doug Morrison:
–“This is where I get hung up. As I’m sure you know.
– How do we guide without being leaders?
– Is such a thing possible?
– Because “leadership” has become the place where people dump all their failures and say “Not my fault!”
– But dumb people do… https://t.co/QvOZKC7Jjp
Source date (UTC): 2024-01-24 23:15:19 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1750296248706327029
RT @curtdoolittle: @Chuck__Sargent @charlesmurray —“Q: CURT: (Sarcasm) What’s one standard deviation among friends?”—
Well, first,…
Source date (UTC): 2024-01-24 22:51:52 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1750290347328962606
—“Q: CURT: (Sarcasm) What’s one standard deviation among friends?”—
Well, first, the tolerance for standard deviations increases with intelligence and decreases in its absence. 😉
THE SCIENCE:
0) The measured response time series from 80 anatomical regions of interest for each participant and found that inter-subject similarities of neural responses among friends were higher than those among non-friends. (Duh…)
1) The standard deviation among friends is about .5 (7pts).
2) The standard deviation during adolescence can be higher as we sort into groups.
3) Higher iQ people tend to have friends from a broader range of intelligence (i don’t have an estimate of the number)
4) Given that communication range between cognitive frameworks is limited to less than two standard deviations, people tend to sort into both physically and virtually groups within those measures.
So… you didn’t ask. But there’s the answer for those who care. 😉
Reply addressees: @Chuck__Sargent @charlesmurray
Source date (UTC): 2024-01-24 22:51:49 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1750290334548967424
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1750289956755431734
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
—“Q: CURT: (Sarcasm) What’s one standard deviation among friends?”
well, first, the tolerance for standard deviations increases with intelligence and decreases in it’s absence. 😉
0) The measured response time series from 80 anatomical regions of interest for each participant and found that inter-subject similarities of neural responses among friends were higher than those among non-friends. (Duh…)
1) The standard deviation among friends is about .5 (7pts).
2) The standard deviation during adolescence can be higher as we sort into groups.
3) Higher iQ people tend to have friends from a broader range of intelligence (i don’t have an estimate of the number)
4) Given that communication range between cognitive frameworks is limited to less than two standard deviations, people tend to sort into both physically and virtually groups within those measures.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1750289956755431734
—“Q: CURT: (Sarcasm) What’s one standard deviation among friends?”
well, first, the tolerance for standard deviations increases with intelligence and decreases in it’s absence. 😉
0) The measured response time series from 80 anatomical regions of interest for each participant and found that inter-subject similarities of neural responses among friends were higher than those among non-friends. (Duh…)
1) The standard deviation among friends is about .5 (7pts).
2) The standard deviation during adolescence can be higher as we sort into groups.
3) Higher iQ people tend to have friends from a broader range of intelligence (i don’t have an estimate of the number)
4) Given that communication range between cognitive frameworks is limited to less than two standard deviations, people tend to sort into both physically and virtually groups within those measures.
Reply addressees: @Chuck__Sargent @charlesmurray
Source date (UTC): 2024-01-24 22:50:19 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1750289956625350656
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1750287259885047820
RT @curtdoolittle: @SaitouHajime00 @NatLawInstitute –“At this point, with the legitimacy of the court in question, what other options do w…
Source date (UTC): 2024-01-24 22:43:15 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1750288181407220067
–“At this point, with the legitimacy of the court in question, what other options do we the people have before resorting to pointy and fast object?”–
Not that my answer will assuage frustrations but, it’s not a question of the legitimacy of the court but that the wrong case has been brought before the court, and that the article in the constitution is stated such that it grants the feds the ability to regulate immigration (invasion).
But that article does not include the same limitations as were common at the time, limiting immigration to white christians and tolerance for some jews, when population density was quite small, and the open territory was quite large, and states had a great deal of sovereignty – that they were deprived of in response to the civil war.
This should have been the argument and that argument was not made.
In my view the court either made an error or the wrong case was brought before the court. In this case, the wrong case was brought fefore the court, and Ms Barrett took the constitution too literally, without including the originalism behind the text – this is the problem with textualism in the absence of originalism.
So, in my opinion both were true.
I think this is an excellent case for forcing the constitutional crisis that weil return sovereignty to the states, and restoring the sovereignty of the states over who may and who may not immigrate into them whether from outside or inside the federation.
I am not entirely sure that this wasn’t a consideration of the court, in that provoking a constitutional crisis will give the court opportunity to act more narrowly and clarify.
But I suspect it would involve attributing too much ability to the members of the court other than Alito and Thomas. Both of whom voted to grant the court authority to prevent a constitutional crisis on this matter.
I suspect that the next cycle of cases by Texas will find purchase in the court.
Cheers
Reply addressees: @SaitouHajime00 @NatLawInstitute
Source date (UTC): 2024-01-24 22:43:07 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1750288144270786560
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1750255016953418013
–“What is the compensation range and distribution of those ceo salaries, and why do they seem high – except say, for entertainment and sports figures?”–
Lesson for the average person: if you take a position as the CEO of a Fortune X company, it is similar to being elected as president, in that when you are done, your career is over. Though you might start another company, be re-hired, or asked to rescue a dying company. You can’t count on it.
So if you take the job, even if it only lasts for five to ten years, it means you must make enough money at the job to retire and devote your time to investing or other work. Because you’ll be all but unemployable.
This isn’t as true for small and midsized companies, where you can sell a company, or resign and shift to a larger company. But for large companies, the truth is, that you will accumulate criticism friends and enemies no matter what you do or how successful you are.
Compensation Range
The compensation range and distribution for CEOs, particularly of large companies like those in the Fortune 1000, vary significantly based on various factors including company size, industry, and performance.
Here is a summary of the data collected:
Average Compensation
The median total compensation for CEOs of top companies (Equilar 100) reached $22.3 million in 2022, an increase from the previous year.
For the average CEO, the tenure has been reported to be around 6.9 to 7.2 years.
Top CEO Compensation
Some of the highest-paid CEOs receive significantly larger compensation, mostly through stock options and bonuses. For instance, Elon Musk’s average yearly bonus was reported at approximately $456.8 million, Sundar Pichai at around $98.9 million, and Andy Jassy at about $53.4 million.
Salary Ranges
For CEOs in general, the average salary in the United States was reported to be around $830,600 as of December 2023, but this figure can vary widely based on several factors.
CEOs in different sectors can have varying average tenures, with those in financial services having the longest at about 8.4 years and those in energy and industrial sectors the shortest at around 6.5 years.
Factors Affecting Compensation
CEO compensation is influenced by company performance, industry-specific trends, regional economic conditions, and individual negotiation skills.
Stock awards form a significant part of CEO compensation, often aligning their interests with company performance and long-term growth.
Comparison with Other C-suite Roles
Compared to other C-suite roles, CEOs generally have longer tenures and higher compensation. For example, chief financial officers have an average tenure of 4.7 years with varying compensation based on the sector.
This data reflects the high level of responsibility and expectations placed on CEOs, as well as the current market dynamics influencing executive compensation.
Cheers
-CD
Source date (UTC): 2024-01-24 22:32:08 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1750285381092638720
CEO DURABILITY? (IT’S ALMOST HALVED)
–CURT: Q: “What is the average duration of employment for the CEO of a fortune 1000 company?”–
The average duration of employment for CEOs, particularly in large companies like those in the Fortune 1000, has been a subject of study and analysis. Based on the available data, the tenure of CEOs has shown a trend of fluctuation over time with a general decrease in recent years.
Recent Trends (As of 2023)
The average tenure of CEOs in 2023 is approximately 7.2 years, marking a 34% decrease compared to 2017.
In the context of the S&P 500, the average tenure and ages of departing CEOs were higher in recent years (10.2 years in 2022, age 62.6) compared to previous periods, but these figures have started to normalize.
Historical Perspective
Historically, the median tenure of a CEO has been around five years, with a notable percentage (19%) of CEOs remaining in position for 10 or more years over the past two decades.
A study by Korn Ferry reported that the average tenure for CEOs dipped to 6.9 years in 2019, down from 8.0 years in 2016.
A longer-term perspective reveals that the median tenure for CEOs was steadily decreasing, with averages dropping from 10 years in 2000, to 8 years in 2016, and approaching 5 years in more recent times.
These trends reflect changes in the business environment, including increased accountability, rapid technological advancements, market volatility, and evolving consumer demands.
Cheers
-CD
Source date (UTC): 2024-01-24 21:34:57 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1750270991098392576
RT @curtdoolittle: –“Q: Curt, what is the best way I can study your work? Is there… for lack of a better term, a lesson plan?”–
Most…
Source date (UTC): 2024-01-24 19:37:26 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1750241419464216936
RT @curtdoolittle: -“Q: WHAT IS THE INSTITUTE’S AGENDA?”-
(Our agenda is to produce a universally commensurable value-neutral science and…
Source date (UTC): 2024-01-24 19:33:12 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1750240354232623251