Suddenly Visible: Illicit Drugs As Part of Silicon Valley Culture 511
The recent death by overdose of Google executive Timothy Hayes has drawn attention to the phenomenon of illegal drug use (including abuse of prescription painkillers) among technology workers and executives in high-pay, high-stress Silicon Valley. The Mercury News takes a look at the phenomenon; do the descriptions of freely passed cocaine, Red Bull as a gateway drug, and complacent managers match your own workplace experiences? From the Mercury News article:
"There's this workaholism in the valley, where the ability to work on crash projects at tremendous rates of speed is almost a badge of honor," says Steve Albrecht, a San Diego consultant who teaches substance abuse awareness for Bay Area employers. "These workers stay up for days and days, and many of them gradually get into meth and coke to keep going. Red Bull and coffee only gets them so far." ...
Drug abuse in the tech industry is growing against the backdrop of a national surge in heroin and prescription pain-pill abuse. Treatment specialists say the over-prescribing of painkillers, like the opioid hydrocodone, has spawned a new crop of addicts -- working professionals with college degrees, a description that fits many of the thousands of workers in corporate Silicon Valley.
Increasingly, experts see painkillers as the gateway drug for addicts, and they are in abundance. "There are 1.4 million prescriptions ... in the Bay Area for hydrocodone," says Alice Gleghorn with the San Francisco Department of Public Health. "That's a lot of pills out there."
Winners don't use drugs! (Score:2, Funny)
Insert coin
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Winners do whatever the fuck they want, and succeed at not getting addicted.
Ban caffeine! (Score:3)
Re:Ban caffeine! (Score:5, Funny)
Ban the 'D'! It's a gateway letter for Drug!
Re:Ban caffeine! (Score:5, Funny)
I guess the Mormons were on to something.
[John]
Re:Ban caffeine! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Gateway Personalities (Score:3)
Definitely. Depression and bipolar depression are widespread, and self-medication with alcohol and other drugs is fairly common. Some people are drunks or stoners or opiate abusers because they like it, but for a lot of people it's because they want to dull the pain or stress. For many of them, there are pharmaceuticals that could do a better job of managing depression or mania, but either they haven't gone to a psychiatrist because of stigmas about mental illness, or because their insurance doesn't cover
The only good thing (Score:5, Insightful)
is that now that rich white people have drug problems (ie, "real" people), maybe we can muster up some sympathy for other addicted people now?
Nah, I'm dreaming.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The only good thing (Score:4, Insightful)
Well I guess that's enough then.
Taking responsibility? Ha! (Score:3)
Yes, it is, takes some fucking responsibility for your own actions.
That's delightfully naive of you. You think someone who is taking drugs to get high is somehow going to be interested in increasing their level of responsibility?
Re:Taking responsibility? Ha! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Taking responsibility? Ha! (Score:5, Insightful)
Among those otherwise without access or interest in fairly serious drugs, an attempt at pain management following injury or illness can be a compelling introduction to the exciting world of stuff that's pretty close to heroin with better quality control. Not everyone develops a habit, of course; but it's an introduction that can happen regardless of circumstance.
Real life is complicated (Score:5, Insightful)
Why did they "have" to start taking drugs in the first place?
Depends on the situation. Some people take them out of pure pleasure seeking. Others get addicted to chemicals like opiates as a result of circumstances well beyond their control like surgeries.
Furthermore just because someone made a bad decision doesn't mean we simply abandon them. Maybe you are the one person who has never made a bad choice in life but I doubt it. Sometimes people make bad choices and a civilized society tries to a reasonable degree to help them through it. We're going to pay for it one way or another anyway so why not do the humane thing and help those who are willing to be helped?
If you take drugs and get addicted, that's your responsibility. Not anyone else's.
Think so? I can introduce you to some former surgery patients and war veterans among others who were introduced to opiates to control pain by their physicians for very real pain problems and as a result were unable to avoid addiction. I can point you to some suffering from PTSD (not their fault) who are trying to find some way to cope who sometimes turn to chemicals because they don't understand what has happened and it is the only relief they can find before they understand what has happened. Some addictions are not the solely the fault of the person taking the drugs.
It's easy and wrong to paint every drug addict with the same broad brush. Some, like the sort you are thinking of, are simply idiots seeking pleasure or escape. If you are snorting cocaine on your yacht for fun, yeah that's on you and if you die I'm not going to cry a river for you. Others are decent people trying to cope with a real problem not of their own making. You really think that a wounded veteran who gets unintentionally addicted to opiates while trying to control pain is solely responsible for his situation? If so you are a very cold hearted person.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:The only good thing (Score:5, Insightful)
Just one of many things you obviously haven't considered. Most people have done drugs, even if that drug is Alcohol. Only a subset of those people are addicts (including addicts who are addicted to Alcohol, ie. "Alcoholics".) If you think that responsibility or lack thereof is the deciding fator, then you really are a moron.
Re:The only good thing (Score:4, Insightful)
Where's the '-1 heartless' mod?
Re:The only good thing (Score:5, Insightful)
When I was in primary school, I was taught by all teachers to not take any drugs, smoke or drink excessively, even painkillers...
Well, one problem is that the teachers lie through their teeth, demonizing marijuana along with heroin. But then you get to high school, and your friends are smoking weed, having fun, and they look fine. You've got older friends who have smoked pot on & off for years without visible consequences. So you try it and, sure enough, it's not the drug you were warned about by your teachers; it's actually fine, except for the consequences of getting caught. Your teachers lied to you, and now you know it.
And the irony is that the most dangerous, most addictive, most popular drugs (alcohol and tobacco), well, these the ones your teachers tell you to use in "moderation." They imply that there's relative safety in these drugs, which is another lie.
So how should you know about the dangers of addiction from heroin or methamphetamines, when your teachers are demonstrably lying to you about drugs?
Re:The only good thing (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The only good thing (Score:4, Informative)
According to the CDC (http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/health_effects/tobacco_related_mortality/) there are "More than 480,000 deaths annually " related to cigarettes and (http://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/alcohol-use.htm) "approximately 88,000 deaths attributable to excessive alcohol use each year in the United States"
In 2011, the CDC says (http://www.cdc.gov/homeandrecreationalsafety/overdose/facts.html) "33,071 (80%) of the 41,340 drug overdose deaths in the United States were unintentional"
So ciggs+alcohol deaths ~ 570,000 deaths per year
Accidental drug overdose ~ 33,000 deaths per year
Now which should be legal and/or a greater concern to society at large? Which likey have a greater economic cost to society? Which has a greater overall impact?
I'm not saying hard drugs aren't bad, but perhaps we should concentrate on what is causing the most damage first.
Re:The only good thing (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The only good thing (Score:5, Insightful)
Someone who deliberately cuts off their own legs with a chainsaw don't get sympathy. So why should addicts?
I imagine someone who would do that on purpose must be suffering from some serious mental problem, or must have been blackmailed or under some kind of duress. Certainly they do deserve sympathy and help.
Re:The only good thing (Score:5, Insightful)
How about the entirely unnecessary, bigoted coercion and force used against them by society to incarcerate them, which they wouldn't have to suffer if they were addicted to something mainstream, i.e. alcohol or tobacco?
Having your life ruined merely for being different is something which should attract sympathy from anyone.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just for me personally, no. I don't drink coffee or alcohol.
[John]
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The only good thing (Score:5, Interesting)
Do I drink coffee? No, actually. At least, not regularly enough to be called a "coffee drinker". I certainly don't drink it for the caffeine - I'm not sure I've ever felt the effects of it. I drink it for the bitter-sweet-milk taste. Otherwise, I mostly drink tea.
What's it like having to live among the Visigoths? You probably should tine down your message of superiority, For there but for the grace of (insert favorite deity here) go you.
The point here is not how great you are, and how if only these weak minded individuals would have listened to their teachers all would be well in. The point of the story is that this is a different story.
Your teachers probably did not sell the idea of the suburban living, family person, with a good paying job and college education as the drug addict.
They probably sold you the bleary eyed guy living under a bridge, stealing to support his addiction, or the once beautiful woman in an alley with her fubber hose, having turned to prostitution to support her heroin habit, or at best, just a stoner, who has permanently addled his brain by taking a hit off that kickass doob some cute girl handed him saying "Come on - everyone's doing it - don't you want to do it?
No, this is an entirely different group. What is worse, by their addiction, they are serving the stockholders. If you have 10 people working 80 plus hours a week, you don't have to pay 25 people to work 40 (remember the inefficiencies - it doesn't scale 1 for 1). This is not your teacher's and societies addicts.
Having worked my share of 24+ hour days, and having my full complement of hours in by Tuesday morning, I can imagine a lot of people becoming addicted to something that keeps them going, then getting involved in downers to bring them back. I never did, managing to get by on coffee abuse only. But I understand very well the pressure. You have the stockholders, the family, and the corporation behind you, demanding anything to increase your productivity.
So yes, I fully understand exactly how this can happen. I avoided it because I understand there is a price to pay, an inevitable crash and burn if you try to do this on a extended basis.
I just don't have your smug attitude about it.
Only perfect people are allowed to be smug. And smugness is a sign of imperfection.
Re: The only good thing (Score:3)
Re:The only good thing (Score:5, Insightful)
Yup, they're constantly warned by old people and movies alike, that only dumb, cool, sexy people with exciting lives do drugs. It's much safer to live like your boring suburban parents, who incidentally probably also do drugs-- at least alcohol, coffee, and antidepressants, if not marijuana and cocaine.
I actually don't do any illegal drugs or prescription drugs. I'm just pointing out that our society sends some seriously mixed messages.
Re: (Score:2)
My parents never did drugs. My father escaped communism in China and my mother's family were poor. They buckled down and got out of poverty and avoided all addictions, even gambling. It isn't hard to not do something that isn't necessary.
Re: (Score:2)
Fine, you're a shining example and the rest of us larvae are not worthy, but please note you are living on a planet with 7 billion people on it; chances are they are not all as amazing as you. Hell, we can't even build integrated circuits with the latest and greatest technology that well.
Re:The only good thing (Score:5, Insightful)
Believe it or not, some people choose to see addicts as people who have made a mistake (at least one!) but are still human and deserve respect.
These sort of arguments along the lines of 'don't get addicted in the first place derp!' sound just like the anti-abortion wackos who say 'don't get pregnant in the first place derrp!' Those arguments fall on their face when you have a baby in your hands, or an addict in the ally. Or you know...fuck em. Right?
Re: (Score:3)
I love that people get offended when people tell them they can do the right thing. I don't do it JUST to lord it over people, even though that is an added bonus. I'm here to tell people that it's OKAY to not follow the crowd, and yes even godless atheists can decide to not take drugs despite there being no divine command to do so.
Consider that I am not offended, but just letting you know that unless you want to come off as pompous, rigid, and condescending you might be having a different effect than you think.
I'm at least as atheistic as you are, it is irrelevent to the conversation.
But I also understand that you seem to have a really rigid outlook on this. I know a woman who was in a car accident. Spent a month in the hospital, and came out addicted to pain killers. Quite a conundrum when you have to wean yourself, but as you d
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
No. You are stupid because you just admitted that most people use drugs, and still can't see how it is absurd to claim that choosing to use drugs is the cause of addiction.
... and you are stupid for openly admitting that you have no experience with the subject matter, but are willing to hold yourself up as some kind of expert anyway. You are doubly stupid for continuing to paint me as the ignor
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
"Drug misuse is not a disease, it is a decision, like the decision to step out in front of a moving car." --Philip K. Dick
Re:The only good thing (Score:5, Insightful)
Or the decision to be born into a hopeless environment with poor parents, all the while being kept that way by the drug and soda companies that profit hugely from your misery, like the Appalachians.
But hey, it's not like we don't give them a chance, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Um, who said otherwise? Are you intentionally misunderstanding or was I too quick?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You always spend your time responding to incorrect or irrelevant posts, or do you just like to read yourself type?
PS: The summary itself brought up economic status, so I don't know what your problem is. Perhaps you should go back to your Mensa meeting and fellate people on your own level instead of wasting your precious, perfect time on grubs like us?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Hey, it worked for Rush Limbaugh! Oh wait ...
Money - the ultimate natural selector (Score:5, Insightful)
The article goes on and on about "workaholism" fueling the need for drugs. My ass - the key story referenced is the one about Hayes getting offed by a hooker injecting a heroin overdose on his yacht. I don't feel a lot of workaholism in that story - ridiculously overpaid unscrupulous douchebag with too much time and money that has saddened and humiliated his family managed to have what looks like plenty of leisure time.
Oh, and this shit is not new at all - been happening in this industry for decades. more noticeable now that a Googler has publicly disgraced himself.
I feel for his family - what a piece of shit.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Drugs are a geat way to network.
Line up a guy with some coke, next thing you know, you got a job.
It's done in other places too and with other substances. How many of guys got a job at a local bar during happy hour? Or get the inside scoop on a new position?
I mean the folks who think skills are all the matters or even are the most important thing are fooling themselves.
It''s all about who you know. Obviously, you can't be a fuck up because they'll know you're one. But if you're good enough and save them t
Re:Money - the ultimate natural selector (Score:5, Insightful)
Not everybody works in marketing.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with you about the workaholism angle as complete BS, but I think you go too far with the second half of your statement.
Geeks in general seem to seek out novelty, which as an underlying character trait, makes us good at what we do. Seeking altered states of consciousness, in
Re: (Score:2)
Don't worry, you will.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I have worked directly with CEO's in the past, when they are doing leisure they are still working. Their phone will go off all times of day.
So he may be on a Yacht, he was probably still working there.
The issue with drugs is it gives people an unfair advantage. At the cost of their long term health. If you are in an environment where everyone else is working 80+ hours per week, you need to in order to not look like a lazy employee dragging everyone down.
Re:Money - the ultimate natural selector (Score:5, Insightful)
How about what he did to his family? Either he was this massive workaholic--that the article tries to imply is a basis for the drug use--obviously too busy getting drugged and/or hookered up on his yacht to spend time with his family or he was just someone who was too busy getting drugged and/or hookered up on his yacht to spend time with his family. Sure, "Hayes' family requested that the media not approach the front door of their gated $4.2-million mansion on Laurent Street" and they have the yacht to sell. But he's fucking dead. He could have well enough left the industry and retired some time ago to spend more time with his family, but then how could he fuel his drug/hooker addictions?
Yep. If he's paid millions of dollars, then all his moral wrongs can be just ignored in the name of being rich. And of course he deserved it, as clearly there's a hundred million jobs in the US that pay millions as a salary so it's just a matter of working hard and nothing to do with a severe selection bias that limits a handful of people who, no matter how hard they work, are paid disproportionately most heavily as a byproduct of luck. And it's all just to feed the most important things in his life--not his five kids or his wife which are relatively cheap, but his drugs, his hooker, and his yacht. Guess what got him killed?
Sure. To work. And since plenty of people work in areas with such high property rates, actually getting out of one's "parents basement" is a very uphill climb. Of course, in the old days it was considered pretty standard to live with family for a good bit of one's life because (1) family was important and (2) there wasn't some inherent shame in living with family. But, no, we got to have everyone be self-made millionaires who move out on their own. But since in cities there is so much more value out of commercial vs residential zones, be prepared to live in a shoe box apartment. Or if you live in the suburbs to pay through the nose and burn through plenty of unneeded gas because the public transport system wasn't built out property when the suburbs came in and those in the suburbs now don't want to have to be with the "common" people on the trains or otherwise see their area be devalued in any way or pay more in taxes to subsidize any sort of public system.
Because to make it, you have to have your own house with your own lawn and your own car. And that ridiculously expensive house can't go down in value or your "investment" just lost hundreds of thousands dollars. But damn the city for all those property taxes!
PS - Yea, over the top. And I agree the GP was to some extent, too. But the way you quickly fawn over the guy as "better" because of his "[contribution] to society"? The biggest way any father can contribute to society is by being a good role model for his children and helping to mold them to be good members of society. I don't think his death on a yacht helps in that regard.
LSD and Intel (Score:4, Interesting)
Internet folklore from the days of Usenet had stories of Intels R&D divisions using LSD to creatively solve problems. It was never talked about, except when the compulsory workplace drug testers came to find their walkway blocked by higher powers when entering the R&D division.
Google has removed references from its search results.
Abusing Ice... (Score:5, Insightful)
Anytime there is significant money and pressure (Score:2)
There are "solutions" that become problems in and of themselves. Workaholism is in the same category... It solves a problem for a while and then becomes a problem itself.
Dragnet (Score:2)
"Looks like I picked the wrong week to give up amphetamines."
Re:Dragnet (Score:5, Informative)
Prescription != illegal != illicit (Score:2)
illegal drug use (including abuse of prescription painkillers)
Is it illegal to abuse legally obtained drugs?
Re:Prescription != illegal != illicit (Score:4, Informative)
Is it illegal to abuse legally obtained drugs?
Um.... Yeah, it is.
Taking it in any way that is contrary to the written prescription is illegal.
As another user asked above, can you cite the law that would be broken?
http://www.cdc.gov/homeandrecr... [cdc.gov]
The above page, for example, discusess "seven state legislative strategies that have potential to impact prescription drug misuse, abuse and overdose," but none of these are about what the patient may do with medication.
I love the little mitigatory clause in there (Score:5, Insightful)
"...illegal drug use (including abuse of prescription painkillers) among technology workers and executives in high-pay, high-stress Silicon Valley. ..."
I know a shit-ton of people whose lives/work is JUST as stressful working their 3 jobs to make ends meet, but since it's not "high pay" that would probably mean they're not worth talking about, right? Certainly, we're less interesting in the 'why' of their drug abuse issues, because they can only afford cheap mood-altering chemistry like booze and cigs.
Personally, I'd say the fact that Silicon Valley folks make stupid-large amounts of money means they have even LESS of an excuse to complain.
Lots of people have more stress for much less self-inflicted reasons than pursuing of giant piles of cash.
This explains a lot (Score:5, Insightful)
No wonder there's so much shitty software being thrown out. People are too stoned or drugged up to have any idea of what they're doing and as a result we get crap such as Windows 8 or the near-monthly Facebook "updates".
But hey, drugs are cool and in no way should the deaths of Philip Seymour Hoffman, Peaches Geldoff, Cory Monteith, Heath Ledger, Dee Dee Ramone and a whole slew of other folks who felt being high was so great that they didn't care if they killed themselves in the process.
Unfortunately we'll have to keep hearing about how poor [insert name] died, how they were a good person and blah, blah, blah.
Fuck that. You think drugs are cool and being high is the thing to do, go for it. Just don't expect the rest of us to give a shit when you're found face down in your home.
Re:This explains a lot (Score:5, Insightful)
all you have to do is look at Portugal. they did this 10 years ago and drug related issues have dropped dramatically.
Re:This explains a lot (Score:5, Interesting)
Not suprised (Score:5, Insightful)
My experience with hydrocodone... (Score:5, Interesting)
A couple of years back I broke my leg. I was given a prescription of hydrocodone and being afraid of them due to all of the addiction stories and the fact that, for some odd reason, my leg never really hurt that badly, I did not take them but I did keep them around. A few months after recovery I was working on my gait and felt something pop in my lower back. The next day I was in severe pain (it was at least 11) and I was told it was a pinched nerve.
I broke down and took one of the hydrocodones and about 20 minutes later, through the slightly lightheaded haze, I experienced some of the most intense, intense hours of extreme focus. I dedicated my time and wrung out tomes of code. It just flowed forth, from the mind of the keys to the screen. After about four hours, it would subside and I'd look back at my work in astonishment. The code was really, really good. I remember thinking to myself "I wrote that!?"
I continued for the next two weeks while my pinched nerve slowly became less inflamed and everything returned to normal. I had about two weeks worth of hydrocodone left in the bottle. But you know what? I had absolutely no desire to take them once the pain in my back was gone. I had no withdrawl symptoms, no shakes, fevers, or anything else. I also did not have a dimwit Valley manager breathing down my neck to finish a project so they could get their next bonus at my expense.
Having spent time working in the Valley, I have little desire to return, if any. Between the terrible drivers, rude hipsters, astronomical real estate prices, strange inexplicable odors, ridiculous grocery prices, PG&E, Comcast, the diseased hot-zone known as Fry's, wall to wall people who are completely oblivious to their surroundings and stand right in the goddamn middle of every aisle in every store ... living in the Valley is absolutely madness! If you live there and like it, you're either nucking futs or you've never experienced normalcy.
Re: (Score:2)
Just an FYI, any one who gives an 11 when asked what their pain level on a scale of 0-10 is pretty much automatically labelled a drug seeker. 10 means the pain is the absolute most you could ever imagine experiencing. Think being disembowelled while being roasted on a spit here and the marinate being tincture of iodine. There simply is no higher score than a ten by non-druggies.
Re:My experience with hydrocodone... (Score:4, Informative)
I had a bad accident which resulted in 2/3rds of my left ring finger getting amputated and the end joint on my middle finger getting fused. Needless to say, I was on a lot of painkillers. 40 mg oxycodone per day for about two weeks, which gradually tapered down to about 5 mg as needed, which amounted to about 5-10 mg a day for maybe 4 months.
Like you, I got kind of tired of the large doses after a while. They made me feel kind of sluggish and lazy. Even when I had tapered down I really kind of resisted taking a second 5 mg dose in one day unless I felt there was a compelling need. It seemed to be more bad side effects and less good value.
I eventually ended up mostly taking a single dose in the morning; for some reason my hand hurt worst in the morning and even if it didn't, not dosing in the morning usually meant my hand hurt worse than normal by mid-day and it was harder to recover (more meds, more time) once it got painful.
Like you, that single dose in the morning seemed to have a kind of calming focus. I'm also a huge coffee drinker, so I would imagine the combination was the key. But I never really wanted another dose during the day. I couldn't recapture the effect from the morning. I just got sluggish.
Unlike you I took them all, probably past where I had a hard-core need, but when they were gone -- zero sense of any withdrawal symptoms. Nothing. My sense is that addiction requires big doses that keep your level up nearly 24 hours a day for weeks. Tiny doses, like 5 mg, once a day probably just can't produce a true physical dependence because you go "dry" after about 8 hours.
I'd probably keep taking them if I had them, but only once a day, and that may be the difference. People who get addicted don't have that "it doesn't work so well in the afternoon" effect; for them it works every time and they really notice it when it stops. I just had no interest in more, it worked against me.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:My experience with hydrocodone... (Score:5, Interesting)
I think growing tolerance to drugs is practically universal. I've known several people who started Prozac etc. and told me, "wow, so THIS is what I've been missing! Life is so great!" But fast forward a year, and they don't seem that much happier. Yet they still have a costly prescription for the rest of their lives.
Hydrocodone, Cocaine, and Methamphetamine (Score:2)
that location makes it a nerd story, you can tell this same sad tale in nearly any modestly sized City.
An interesting question is, "Are the abused prescription drugs more widely available to top earners?"
The oxys and hydrocodone are super-addictive, and may (to their detriment)
be more widely available by prescription to folks who seem to have their act together... physician's discretion, if you will.
Biaised article and subject (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It could've been an accidental overdose, although reports from The Prosecution regarding the video evidence seem to indicate the alleged and easily identifiable tattooed hooker was rather cold-hearted given the accident/situation, and more than willing to walk away from all of it entirely, with the curtains drawn once it all went down, perhaps even with some sense of thrill given her past praise published on the internet for the TV series known as 'Dexter'. She could have looked around for a phone somewhere
Red Bull as a gateway drug? (Score:5, Insightful)
I've known a lot of people with very poor time management and life skills, who lived in constant panic and crunch time as a result. Rather than managing the introspection required to address their personal failings that were leading to this, they'd just down as much Red Bull as they could under the misguided belief that it'd give them the energy to deal with all of their crap.
So is it any surprise that they then turn to meth or other real drug to try and improve on the boost energy drinks may or may not have been giving them? (I have no idea if they work, they just made me short term wired and irritable.)
Red Bull's not a gateway drug - but it's often co-morbid with personality types that are going to find their way into meth. Obviously the vast majority of people aren't using it as some kind of "gateway" to meth, or else we could call coffee a gateway drug too.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Rather than managing the introspection required to address their personal failings that were leading to this...
Ah, yes! All it takes is to sit down and think about it because everyone is brought up the same way and with the same values.
See, I grew up in an extremely angry alcoholic household. I didn't know it growing up because as far as I was concerned (I was a child after all!) that was normal. As I grew up, gradually I started to see a pattern but was clueless as to exactly what was the problem - I pretty much thought that people sucked. Drinking a bottle of wine at a time was normal. Screaming at someone to be
Where's the drug tests? (Score:5, Insightful)
There are those who would test all welfare recipients for drug abuse on the grounds that poor folks are users. Never mind that the data shows most people on welfare work and stuff.
Those really looking to solve societies ills might do better to test the other end of the economic spectrum.
The magic D word (Score:2)
As soon as drug usage is mentioned in a given area of commerce, the federosaurus gets to suspend the Constitution. Silicon Valley is being seen as a place of wealth right now, and invoking the drug war gives authorities the right to steal however much of it they want without due process.
And no, developers don't shoot heroin to get projects completed faster.
Silicon Valley problem? (Score:2)
Silicon Valley problem? No... it's an American problem. Is there anyone here that doesn't know someone with an addiction problem? It's part of our culture. Who we are, and what we have is never good enough. There's always someone better on TV, the movies, the internet, and why aren't our bodies like that? Why am I not that calm? Why am I not that strong? Why can't I deal with stress that well? We're spoon fed lies via a screen and then find there is no natural way for us to meet our fictitious ambitions so
Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)
Here in Providence, RI (Score:2)
Which is proactive in my opinion. But the problem exists even here. We've had a number of heroin overdoses the last few years that resulted in death. Now that there's a treatment available people no longer need to fear the first responders so much.
Cultural cycle speed-heroin (Score:3)
Doesn't the cultural cycle of drugs always go from speed to heroin? Speed provides the energy and "go" but the come down is rough, so there's a turn towards tranquilizers and opioids as a way to manage the come-down.
I've never been on that merry-go-round, but the older I get the more sleep deprivation hurts, physically. It's not just being tired, my body aches, almost like the early stages of strep throat or the flu. A little opioid would really take the edge off that.
It's not hard to see adderall and vicodin/oxycodone being a popular combination in Silicon Valley.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
About the point of the article.... (Score:3)
I just skimmed half of the 300 or so comments, and have yet to see anyone consider the point of the article, rather than whether they said "Red Bull is a gateway drug".
Y'know, the real point: upper managers, under the heel of venture capital who want 1000% ROI next week, giving people insanely impossible deadlines, and then getting them (under threat of being fired) to work far beyond any reason when it's not a disaster zone (say, a flood) or the middle of a war zone.
And if you work like that, with not a trace of a life, and think you're Important, there's another word for you: sucker. I'd even add stupid sucker.
mark, who swore he'd never do that again after breaking 70 hours in one week in the mid-nineties
(and did I mention the pagers?)*
* Admittedly, not crazy enough to do what one of the young what-was-then-Anderson Consulting guys did: 1 week, 119 hours....
Suddenly? (Score:3)
Noticed in 2011-2012 (Score:3)
Re:Red Bull (Score:5, Informative)
Did you seriously just call Red Bull a gateway drug?
Tim Lord, you're a moron. Stop posting stories, this isn't your personal blog. And no, writing them and then having Roblimo or another slashdot editor post the stories doesn't make it any better. Just stop, we don't want your thoughts.
He didn't call Red Bull a gateway drug, the article(s) did and he paraphrased to ask if anyone else's work environment treats Red Bull as a 'gateway drug.' It might be interesting to note, as we're all aware, that Red Bull is most commonly not treated as a gateway drug. If you arrive new on the job and a sage elder looks at you drinking a Red Bull and says "I remember when that sufficed but give it time and you'll be on the hard stuff like the rest of us ..." *taps his nose* then it might be considered a gateway drug.
Re: Red Bull (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
I'd say the real gateway drug is milk. Every drug user drank milk, but that wasn't good enough so they went to alcohol.
The whole "gateway" drug idea is a farce. No one moves from one drug to another automatically like there is some progression laid out in the laws of the universe. Alcohol, marijuana, and opiates all work on different receptors in the body. Any drug can be a gateway to another if one seeks to get high and builds up tolerances to every drug they try.
Re:Red Bull (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Red Bull (Score:5, Insightful)
It's kind of a gateway drug, in that once you open the Red Bull gate you are entering a world where you pay triple for the equivalent energy of a banana, and the equivalent caffeine of a cup of coffee. It's kind of like a gateway to a world of dummies.
Unless of course you shop for Red Bull at Costco vs buying your Double Mocha Lattes from Starbucks. In which case your Red Bull caffeine price will be less than a quarter than that of the Starbucks content.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
But then you could also buy your coffee at costco, and a nice flask, and you get your cheapest caffeine every day and less disposable cups going to landfills.
You could also live in a country where you could grow and roast your own coffee beans. There is always a price vs convenience tradeoff.
Though, another point worth mentioning is that coffee's stimulant effect on the body wears off after a while as the body learns to adapt.
Which is great reason to kick the caffeine addiction habit in the first place.
Some athletes will give up coffee so that their caffeine gels are a bit more effective on race day.
There was an Australian Modern Pentathlon competitor who was sent home from the 1988 Soul olympics due to excess caffeine levels (but was later cleared).
Re: (Score:3)
>You could also live in a country where you could grow and roast your own coffee beans. There is always a price vs convenience tradeoff.
Growing your own will cost far more. Think economies of scale.
>Which is great reason to kick the caffeine addiction habit in the first place.
Mormons up in the house, I see.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
There is no Taurine [wikipedia.org] in bananas or coffee.
If people want to pay for beverages with extract from animal tissue or synthetics produced from cyclic ether who are we to argue? ;-)
Re: Red Bull (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:3)
Bottled water is many times from city sources, it has been filtered again, but is many times still fluoridated.
If you don't want chlorine, put your water in a non-sealed picture in the fridge. The chlorine will evaporate out.
Re: Red Bull (Score:4, Funny)
Pitcher. Pitcher. PITCHER.
For the love of god, it's PITCHER.
I swear, people get stupider by the day.
Re: (Score:3)
LMAO, Taurine is not a stimulant.
Re: Red Bull (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Maybe they need a union (Score:5, Insightful)
Are you kidding, a significant portion of those people are under the delusion that if they work their ass off now, they will be start-up billionaires by the time they're 30. And guess what, there are plenty of companies that are more than happy to indulge their fantasy. Only, after five-to-ten years of that crap do they start to realize that except for a very small few, it is a pipe dream. Of course, by that time they are considered too old for the industry and are replaced by another delusional young go-getter and the cycle repeats. They don't want a unions or regulations, or anything that might jeopardize their chance at being the next software / web billionaire. The ironic thing is that while this is one of the most liberal areas in the country, the entire place is like an Ayn Rand dystopia.