u/la_gata_Porrita

>!I made a mistake in the title, this contains season 2 spoilers, not season 1.!<

>!“Before you, only three people have reached this door: Salvador Quinn, Mary Meadows, and George Wilkins. I did not speak with Wilkins. Quinn and Meadows were both given the same directive you will now receive: If you speak to anyone about this conversation, or what you have seen down here, we will have no choice but to initiate the Safeguard. Do you know what the Safeguard is, Mr. Kyle?”!<

>!If we assume the directive means “do not to tell anyone about this conversation or being down there,” the voice would have initiated the safeguard when Meadows found it? Meadows found it because she deciphered Quinn’s message. So, as far as the voice knows, Quinn told. Quinn’s message is really quite cryptic, but he told.!<

>!Equally, George found the door. The voice doesn’t know how, but he could have been told. And if the whole secret to be preserved is about the door at the bottom, that none outside IT should know about it, the voice would have initiated the safeguard when George found it because the secret had been discovered by a non IT person. So why doesn’t it? Secret revealed, danger, initiating safeguard.!<

>!And if the voice spoke with Quinn 140 years ago, the voice has to be a program, not a human?!<

>!The voice says “I did not speak to Wilkins”, it says I to refer to itself, but later it says “we will have no choice but to initiate the safeguard.” Is it one or many?!<

Hi everyone
I have a problem with my manager and I don't know how to talk to them.

Context:

• I am mid-manager level, have 10+ years, and have been a senior manager before, I've managed people at a senior level
• I am new to this job, barely 2 months, and I barely know my manager or the organisation or the projects that are going on
• I have capacity, work is really quiet right now and I get massively bored at work, I am used to owning things and having responsibility and working in stressful environments

Problem

• My boss complains repeatedly that she has too much on and that she needs help. She stays at work till 10 pm.
• In the meantime she has barely introduced me to any projects or workstreams, beyond the basic inductions about the company, the team, etc. I don't know how many workstreams there are or at what stage.
• She has posted in a Teams channel a list of projects and has assigned owners to those projects. But it's just that, a list. She has not introduced me to any of them, and most of the projects in that list still don't have an owner (so she has "delegated" about a quarter of them, not the majority).

I am so confused about this situation that the other day I posted in the Teams channel something really quite generic -- "I have capacity, is there anything I could take on right now?" - then she posted again the list.

I am really struggling to understand the situation here. If she wants me to own a, b and c, what is preventing her from putting time aside to sit with me and brief me on those workstreams? I was so baffled by her response to my question, that I did not reply, I did not know what to say, I even found it rude.

Then she added me to a call about a project "a" in the afternoon. That's a project that I own, theoretically. The call starts and she starts talking about the project to everyone, takes notes, decides next steps, everything. It was about an online tool that is being created, she showed us the tool on the screen.

I have even approached her physically in the office to offer help, but she is always busy. In calls, or talking to someone. I honestly don't have the moment to talk to her.

My problem here is: why has she not briefed me on that project? According to her list it is my project but I still lack the basic facts of the situation.

• what is the ambition
• do we have a deadline
• the tool needs development, who created it
• can I have the link to the tool (it's web-based), I don't have it, I can't even test it
• where is the tool pulling data from, who's the contact for that
• the context, the email chain, the background

So I am really baffled about:

• Why is she not briefing me on the project
• Why is she responding to me with a list when I ask what I can help with
• How does she expect me to own it when she is leading in the calls and not even telling the participants that from now on I will own it, when she's not giving me the basic context
• Does she not realise that I am new, I need context?

So I spoke to a colleague about this situation (my manager complaining all the time about how busy she is, and not having been briefed on any of my projects). My colleague said yes, this is happening, but don't expect her to give you a brief, it doesn't work like that.

How does it not work like that? Does she not know that someone who has just joined the company would expect a brief? And if she really wants to step back, why doesn't she give me the brief and then step back? Why does she organise the calls, lead during the call, etc?

I am so confused. But today I am irritated. I was told that my expectation is unreasonable and that I have to talk to her about what I need to be able to take on my projects. I find that profoundly unfair. I am even worried that it is going to affect my probation. I'm not doing anything, when there is all this work to do, and somehow it will be my fault.

Then I thought about it and was like -- ok, it seems that she doesn't know how to delegate, so I'll have to tell her what I need, but I feel deeply uncomfortable about doing this. I don't know, I find the basics so elemental that the fact that I need to tell my boss that she needs to give me a brief makes me really uncomfortable. I don't know how to tell her that without blushing. It's such an obvious fact to me. I've done it a million times (in my previous more senior roles). I sit with a person, I tell them you need to take this on, this is the project, the ambition, the stage of the project, the deadline and the key contacts and who does what. So the fact that I have to explain this to her makes me baffled, and I know I won't know how to tell her this. I will blush, feel deeply embarrassed, I don't know if I will be able to be tactful, etc. It's also starting to make me nervous, so I am not even confident that I will be able to tell her this calmly. It's very stressful to me to observe this situation and see she is not doing anything about it, even after I have offered help.

I was also a bit upset about how she responded to my question and what my colleague said to me "don't expect a handover." I am not just going to take over from her without a proper handover, she is my boss, more senior, I wouldn't take a project from her without permission.

I've heard a lot before about managers who don't know how to delegate but I never encountered one for real. I don't know how to tackle this.

Help please.

>!How come Juliette made it to silo 17 undetected, whilst Kenney & Kyle got attacked so very quickly? Here's what we know:!<

• >!Juliette goes outside from Silo 18. She has the good tape. She is gassed. She walks outside and sees the fake video feed. She continues walking into the horizon and nothing attacks her.!<
• >!Later, Kennedy and Kyle leave Silo 18 with the same good tape and are also gassed. They don't receive the video transmission, but they communicate with Martha via radio. Then they are attacked.!<

>!It's pretty much the same, with one main difference: Juliette has the video feed from Silo 18, while Kennedy and Kyle don't have the video feed but communicate with Martha by radio. In other words, Juliette is only receiving information through the helmet video feed, while Kennedy and Kyle are both receiving and transmitting information through the radio.!<

>!What if that distinction matters? What if the radio signal makes them detectable? Radio transmissions can be located. Something monitoring the outside could potentially detect the signal and work out where it is coming from. Kennedy and Kyle are actively communicating with Silo 18, which could effectively be shouting, “We're here.” That could explain why they are attacked while Juliette isn't.!<

>!That would also mean the outside isn't simply passively toxic, like a poison. It looks as if it is actively detecting people and it can move and aim at the targets it detects.!<

>!Furthermore, if the attack was really carried out by nanobots or drones, you would imagine that such technology would use multiple data signals to detect targets: heat maps, movement sensors, radio signals. So it makes perfect sense that they were able to get to Kyle and Kennedy fast, if they were indeed able to locate them through the radio signals, but not Juliette.!<

>!And there's another interesting detail. Before the attack Kyle is the one communicating by radio, while at the end of the episode it is Kennedy who is broadcasting. Could that mean Kyle was harmed or incapacitated because he was the one actively transmitting? If transmitting is the key, then Kyle would have been the clearest target.!<

>!Another reason that led me down this rabbit hole is that they have been building the radio theme for a while, with Bernard even saying that Silo 1 monitors some frequencies. In this episode, they were taking advantage of radio, but maybe it is a double-edged sword.!<

>!Finally, this episode was titled “Radio”.!<

>!I obviously don't know if this is the answer, but if the writers wanted to give us one small detail that explains why two apparently identical trips outside had completely different outcomes, the radio seems like a pretty damn good candidate.!<

>!———!<
>!Edit:!<
>!For everyone saying that the algorithm simply knew about K&K and was prepared, but caught by surprise in Juliette’s cleaning, I find that is correct but still unconvincing, insufficient, and I think that the radio signal made a significant difference:!<

• >!The algorithm/voice is aware of both outings. During Juliette’s outing it calls Bernard with the lighting key fob. So it’s watching and getting info.!<
• >!Once that Juliette crosses the horizon line, the algorithm should be freaking out, not just because it has never happened before, but also because the siloes are pretty close. Juliette, as it happens, ends up in a dead silo, but what if she ended at a fully functional silo, approaches the display to ask for help and is seen by everyone. I mean, at that point the algorithm should be doing something to prevent that from happening because it is a very high risk to the whole design, even if remote. !<
• >!This algorithm boasts about the safeguard being pretty total, but in the case of Juliette it fails to deploy it on time. Why? !<
• >!Juliette’s outing might have been slower and longer, she’s getting the video feed, so can’t know where she is going, has no direction. She would have initially walked slower, the opportunity to kill her would have been greater. !<
• >!Juliette crosses the horizon line, getting out of sight from the silo. The algorithm could have killed her without witnesses. !<
• >!The outing of K&K was moved ahead out of the blue, without permission or warning. Even Camille didn’t know they were going out before dawn, and she looks pretty pissed off when she finds out. So how could the algorithm have been more prepared for this outing? It would be less prepared, not more.!<

>!This post is just saying that it was able to find Kyle super quickly because he was giving away his location by transmitting. In the case of Juliette, it probably tried but it didn't have enough information to take her down before she reached 17?!<

Apologies, I can't reply to all comments.

The lack of vegetation after 300+ years makes perfect sense. It has nothing to do with whether the poison is still active or not.

This is how it works. The initial poison would have killed the plants that were there originally. If the poison was active for a while, once all the plants were gone, the environment would have started to change.

Plants normally protect the soil. Their roots hold it together, and dead plants add organic matter that helps the soil hold water. Without plants, the soil would slowly become worse and easier to erode.

Then you have the lack of rain. Even if some seeds eventually reached the area, they would have a very hard time growing without enough water.

And after 300+ years, there may not be many plants nearby producing new seeds in the first place, so no viable seeds around.

So you get a vicious cycle:

No plants → worse soil → less water retention → new plants can’t grow → more erosion → still no plants.

Once you get that self-fulfilling cycle, the effects start to compound and recovery becomes extremely hard. After enough time, nothing would grow even if all the poison is entirely gone because the soil has massively degraded, there are no viable seeds, and it doesn’t even rain. For all we know not only plants have died, but also all microscopic forms of life, like funghi, bacteria in the soil, etc.

After 300+ years of barrenness, recovering vegetation would likely require a major environmental restoration effort. Humans would have to actively restore the environment. They would need to bring in seeds or plants, add organic matter and nutrients to the soil, provide water, and gradually create conditions where plants could survive and reproduce again. And this would take time. With conditions like that, it wouldn't be an easy task. You wouldn't just be planting a few seeds and watering a bit. You'd essentially be trying to restart an ecosystem from almost nothing.

So the poison doesn’t need to still be active to explain the desolation we see. It would have been caused by the original destruction, and then over time the environment would basically get stuck in a barren state of continuous degradation. Recovery wouldn’t start automatically once the poison has faded. Without rain, roots, organic matter, seeds, we would basically end up with endless dust. And that’s exactly what we see.

I do not know if the poison has faded or not, I am simply saying that the damage to the environment at this stage would be pretty permanent and very hard to revert. And if you give it enough time, it could become irreversible. Nature is resilient, but not unbreakable.

Just wanted to check, after the last episode, it is pretty clear there’s no poison outside? Does everyone agree?

1. Silo 17 citizens got killed by the dust that came back?
2. Those sent to clean were gassed before leaving and that killed them (bad tape)
3. Lucas Kyle and Patrick Kennedy wear good tape but get attacked by something (I think buzzing nanobots).
4. Why was Juliette not killed by the same thing that attacked them? Did silo 1 just got lazy and didn’t check whether she died?

And the dust and what attacked Lucas and Patrick is the same thing? Shame Solo said “dust”, not “buzzing dust”!

Even with no poison outside, the world outside looks pretty inhospitable? Kennedy certainly seems to think so!

When are our heroes going to figure it out? It seems pretty critical to come back from 17. They might not need suits, but something else…

Scroll down for TL;DR

The Real Mystery

I think the real mystery in Silo is when they are allowed to go out, who allows it, and under what conditions.

We do not know why we are here.
We do not know who built the Silo.
We do not know why everything outside the Silo is as it is.
We do not know when it will be safe to go outside.
We only know that day is not this day.

That ending, “not this day”, has been bothering me. If the only thing they know is that the day is not today, then when will it be, and how will they know? It sounds like a self-fulfilling prophecy. By saying "not this day" every time, there is no horizon for resolution. It equates to "never." It is like saying "I'll quit smoking tomorrow" every day. That tomorrow never comes.

And if there is a day when they can go outside, how will they know? Who tells them, how is that determined, and based on what?

A Total Blind Spot

What is really strange about the Silo is that they know nothing about the conditions outside, other than that it is poisonous, and they are not even monitoring them. It would make sense for the Silo leadership to carry out regular tests on the atmosphere to see if the poison has receded, but they don’t. Other than looking at the display, they have no system to find out. It is a total blind spot.

Yes, maybe there is no poison outside, and they are simply gassed when they leave. That is not my point. My point is that they are doing nothing to measure the conditions. Not the Mayor, not Judicial, not IT. So who is?

The Safeguard as a System

Thinking about the safeguard now, we learned in the last episode that one cannot escape it. The voice tells Camille that the inhabitants of Silo 17 only prevented the safeguard momentarily, and they were killed outside anyway. The voice suggested that one cannot prevent it. This makes me think of the safeguard as a system of measures, not just a single thing. It is not just a pipe with poison, but different mechanisms to prevent them from leaving.

Here are some scenarios:

• They disable the pipe and go out: The safeguard kills them outside.
• They disable the pipe and stay inside: The safeguard doesn't kill them, but all silos will eventually run out of critical supplies. One could think of the limit on supplies as part of the safeguard.
• They do nothing because they forget (memory drugs): It doesn't matter. They are running out of critical supplies, so they will eventually perish.

Whatever the safeguard is, it makes more sense to see it as a system of measures: the pipeline, the buzzing, the limit on supplies, and more. It seems pretty total.

The Plan to Go Out

If the safeguard is a system to keep them inside, when can they actually go out? And how will they know? We don't know, but we do know they have no control whatsoever. Someone has to allow them, whether that is the voice, Silo 1, or whoever is in control. At this point, I am thinking the doors will just open by themselves one day, and that will be the end.

But when will they allow it, and under what conditions?

One could argue they will never be allowed out, and that the plan is simply to create subterranean societies. I think that is unlikely. They are provided with limited critical supplies, not forever supplies. The founders went to a lot of trouble and investment to create this. And we are told in flashbacks that they have a plan to save the world. Whatever that involves is hard to see right now.

A More Sinister Plan

I think something really fishy is going on, beyond just living in an oppressive society or a devastated world. There is something else happening, probably far more sinister, that we do not know yet. I also think our characters don't know it either, not even the heads of IT, Bernard or Camille. It has to do with when and why they will be allowed out. Maybe Quinn figured it out when he wrote "the game is rigged."

The theory taking shape in my head is that the silos are a form of societal engineering, an experiment to see how these societies evolve. That is probably the test that decides when they go out. It is not merely about the conditions outside, but about how these societies have evolved over hundreds of years, and if they can be trusted to go outside.

Why does it make sense to think of the silos as a controlled experiment?

• There are many of them: These are the experiment groups.
• There are things they cannot do: These are the rules of the test.
• Silos cannot interact: These are typical test conditions to prevent contamination.
• If a silo goes rogue, they are safeguarded: They are eliminated from the experiment.
• One silo oversees all: This is the director of the test.

The End Goal

What is the end goal? I don't know, but with the memory drugs, forbidden relics, and lack of technology, it seems the founders are forcing humanity back to a previous level of civilisation, like the industrial or pre-industrial revolution. Is the hope that humanity will not re-develop the technologies that ended the world, like nukes, climate change, or AI?

Alternatively, they use birth control and restrict who has children, so it could be about genetic selection. You put similar populations under controlled conditions and watch them over generations to select for certain traits. When things go rogue, you apply memory-erasing drugs to let the experiment continue. If a society fails completely, they eliminate it to protect the rest of the experiment. Could the goal be to create a completely docile society that blindly follows a leader, maybe even an AI leader?

I really don’t know. What are other theories about the end goal?

What This Theory Explains

It explains why there are many silos, why they must remain unaware of each other, why the safeguard is total, and why there is a voice running things.

More importantly, I think it explains why Quinn used memory drugs: to ensure the survival of his silo. They were rebelling every 20 years, making them likely to be safeguarded at any time. Quinn was aware of the safeguard and concluded that forgetting was a necessary reset to ensure the long-term continuity of the silo.

TL;DR:

• Outside controllers (like Silo 1) run the silos as a secret, centuries-long evolution test.
• Unknowing IT heads enforce the rules, and a total-system safeguard eliminates any rogue silo that rebels or escapes without permission.
• Quinn figured out this rigged game, and he used the memory drugs because it was the only way to save his silo from destruction.

Camille is a pretty unique character. Everyone we know who has learned about the safeguard turns against the system, so to speak.

• Quinn wrote his coded message, "the game is rigged", a small act of rebellion.
• Meadows resigned from IT and went nihilist, depressed or something (is that why she took up drinking?), then decided she wanted to go out.
• Bernard decided to quit and go out, because why not, we are all going to die either way, her beloved had died already and what he believed in and devoted his life to cannot be trusted.
• Sims turned against the voice and his own wife, and sided with Bernard and Mechanical in a pretty spectacular U turn.
• Solo’s parents capped the pipe at 17, effectively disabling the safeguard procedure. What a pity that people went out anyway!
• Kyle resigned from IT and hid in the mines after having been promoted to IT shadow and gained access to all the knowledge in the world. Huh.

Of all the IT characters we know, only Camille continues to trust the system and play along. Isn’t that strange?

One could argue she does it for her son, but Sims is equally concerned about their son and takes a very different view. So I think that motherly protection, or maternal instinct, whilst certainly at play and a priority for her, doesn’t fully explain it.

Or one could also say that it is because of a zealous faith in the system, but I don’t quite see it. She seems smart and calculating, good at understanding situations and even playing both sides (as in the rebellion). So faith doesn’t cut it for me. I don’t see a Pact zealot in Camille.

I am left with: she is smart and understands one cannot outsmart the Voice, a formidable force, so it is better to play along?

What’s your view?

Apologies if this has been asked before - why is there no voice in the vault of silo 17? IT has its own power source so it is not lack of power (if an AI).

Or is there one, it hears, but it chooses not to speak because that silo is lost?

If the voice is the same one thing across all siloes, it would know that Jules was in 17 and what happened there?

Edit: adding that I think the voice still has visibility in 17, no reason to think it doesn't as there is power and the hardware would have been completely undamaged by events (Solo locked himself there, none else went in). Therefore it could listen in, know what goes on in there, and this might give it some moves. It'd be interesting to see if it makes an appearance when Kennedy and Kyle make it there (if they do!).