>The article uses struggly words like sociopaths and losers, but defines them very differently from common use, often the 'losers' have the most fulfilling and rounded lives, i.e. true winners

They're "losers" from the point of view of capitalism and corporate hierarchy. If you're not committing your life to ruthlessly climb the ladder to grasp at wealth and power by any means and you don't buy into the game or its rules, you're basically a defective cog, a useless part of the machine.

If you're unaware that success is a rigged lottery designed to find and promote sociopaths and actually believe that reward comes with hard work, determination and passion, you're clueless. A mark. A rube. If you're smart enough, with enough abuse you'll eventually wake up and become a loser.

> They're "losers" from the point of view of capitalism and corporate hierarchy. If you're not committing your life to ruthlessly climb the ladder to grasp at wealth and power by any means and you don't buy into the game or its rules, you're basically a defective cog, a useless part of the machine.

You have too narrow a definition of capitalism and of corporate hierarchy. What you describe is one outworking of them, but not the outworking.

It's BY FAR the most common outworking. Most people won't be lucky enough to find a job that doesn't work that way.

Can you cite where you know this from?

This is pervasive across US corporate culture and present in 4/4 different sectors I have been employed.

Based off your statement in another thread "I've never really been to the US, other than a couple of brief work trips" - I can understand your view, but it is indeed the most common paradigm. Will happily review your sources that refute my experience.

Personal experience and the experience of the developers that I've met.

yes.