Ignoring the odd idea that this hypothetical person is somehow completely unemployable regardless of industry or upskilling, why do you assume that that immediately makes them a negative to society? Is a person’s entire value predicated on their ability to earn money?
Any recommended brands/models for the pillow? I’ve never heard of such a thing, but it sounds incredible.
I use a similar question: “What do you like best about working here?” I then follow up that conversation with a second question: “We all know every place has something they could improve on. If you could change one thing about working here, what would it be?”
I’ve gotten some very interesting answers to that second question. And because it’s not phrased as a complete negative - “what would you change” vs. the more common “what do you dislike” - it doesn’t put people on the defensive.
A second opinion on your resume certainly couldn’t hurt. If money’s a concern, I think there’s a community on Reddit that allows you to submit your resume for review? Tread with caution, of course, but it could be worth a shot. Or I’ve seen people on LinkedIn or various job sites that help give back to their respective communities by providing resume feedback - I’d probably look for people in HR or who work as hiring managers.
That sucks about your business, but I think being honest about it is your best bet if/when it comes up. Businesses fail for a variety of reasons, plenty of which won’t necessarily reflect poorly on you. And if the gap is the last five years, well, there’s definitely been enough going on in that timeframe that you won’t be the only one with an employment gap.
Applying for jobs can often be a numbers game, but if you’re not reaching the interview stage at all you may want to have someone review your resume for you. It might be that you’re not highlighting your skills and experience in a way that the systems will pick up on - every industry seems to have it’s own buzzwords - or you might also have a resume format that the ATS can’t parse correctly.
I’ve been using Summit lately and like it so far; the dev is responsive and there are quite a few customization options.
I previously used Sync (now abandoned), Jerboa, and Connect as well. Jerboa didn’t seem quite so customizable, but it was a nice and simple UI.
I haven’t tried Boost, but I swapped over to Summit and have been pleased with the experience. The thing I liked most about Sync was the amount of customization; Summit fills that space quite well.
Maybe Valheim? You could turn the settings to peaceful mode if you don’t want to deal with combat quite yet - although combat at the beginning isn’t super in-depth - but it doesn’t have a ton of buttons and the start of the game is a lot of basic “walk around and find things to interact with.”
Why do they need to work, though? If AI can replace so many people that there aren’t jobs for them all, wouldn’t that also mean AI is producing enough to sustain those people, jobs or not? At that point, why must society continue to expect everyone to support themselves if society’s developments as a whole make that unnecessary?
OP’s question seemingly indicated that they felt someone who couldn’t earn money was immediately a net negative to society. I don’t believe that’s true now (stay at home parents are a good, but far from only, example), and I can’t see me believing it’s any more true in a future where AI can replace large segments of the workforce.