This is basic security clearance stuff. It you're doing anything that gives someone leverage over you (outside of your job), you don't get to know anything important. Seems reasonable to me.
No, it's completely insane, and a circular argument. If you gamble, you could be blackmailed by somebody threatening to tell your boss. Your boss will fire you for that because... it creates leverage? It's only leverage because the boss makes it leverage. If the boss would butt his dumb ass out of your private life, it wouldn't be effective as leverage anymore.
Example: Dickhead calls your boss and tattles on you for gambling. Your boss yawns and says "Who gives a fuck?" and hangs up. Look! No leverage!
With fall (autumn) just getting started, the season is fresh and novel for most of us after experiencing the summer. It's no surprise the fall is coming in first, followed by summer (the next most recent thing you experienced) followed by spring (the again next most recent thing). And winter, the furthest back in memory, is coming in last. I have little doubt that if we executed this poll in the summer, the results would simply rotate around.
Every season seems fresh, new, and stimulating when it begins. Personally, I'm enjoying the fall start, but I can't kid myself -- summer and spring are my favorites, for different reasons. But yeah.. I'm digging fall, but it'll get old in a month or so.
The term "WMD" was intended to distinguish certain weapons of "mass destruction" from other conventional weapons, for instance conventional bunker-busting bombs. With respect to military weapons, a convention explosive bomb capable of leveling a three story building is not considered a WMD. WMD was meant to describe weapons such as thermonuclear bombs, mass chemical and biological agents, etc.
It appears we no longer have a useful term to refer to weapons which cause "mass destruction." Apparently, a couple of ounces of low-velocity explosive packed inside a metal container one can acquire at Walmart now meet the qualification. This is ludicrous.
Or, you know, you could work out those problems with a design before you start.
Can you list the projects you've worked on where there was a complete, correct design at the beginning, and that design was then flawlessly executed? I would like to study and learn from such projects.
As I understand it, in a stand-up, one is supposed to say what one did yesterday (I don't care), what one is going to do today (again, I don't care), and what road-blocks, if any, you have (and, unless your problems affect me doing my work, I still don't care).
So you're saying if a fellow team member is doing something in a way you think could be done better, you just stay silent? If a team member is planning to do something that you think isn't actually necessary because of something you're doing, you just stay silent? If a team member is struggling with a problem you have the skill set to help out with, you just stay silent?
It's true, for Agile to work, you need to have a team. The group you are a part of doesn't seem to fit the definition (or at least you don't).
I love how in your comment you specify that there are "specific programs" that could be cut without elaborating on what those actually are.
War spending. If you're going to force me to state the fucking obvious, there you go.
You've been Berkeley'ed!