Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Most employees of NYT won’t be required back in physical offices until 2021

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 409 posts

Re: Most employees of NYT won’t be required back in physical offices until 2021

#361

Post by Klinky »

ByteJockey wrote: post #351
Klinky wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obamacare was huge for pre-existing conditions and the marketplace, you actually had options now, instead of zero. Also Obamacare was watered down to appease Republican interests at the time. There was no interest in building bridges during it's building, Republicans were laying out the dynamite, and spent a hell of a lot of wasted effort after Trump took office trying to trigger that dynamite. It is hard to meet in…

Wasn't it watered down (specifically the public option being removed) to get Lieberman's vote? Why would they try to appease people who weren't going to vote for it?

Why? Naivety. He wanted it to be bipartisan. This is about as in the middle as you can get, and it wasn't good enough. It wasn't just watered down for the blue dogs or Lieberman.

The article below goes into more detail.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/08/01/set-health...

Re: Most employees of NYT won’t be required back in physical offices until 2021

#362

Post by coffeefirst »

chrisco255 wrote: post #213
UncleOxidant wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's amazing how so many people/entities want to pretend that somehow the pandemic is less dangerous now than it was in March when we started all of the isolating/WFH. When in fact we have a lot more cases now, high levels of new cases and more than half the states have R0 > 1.0. https://rt.live/

Yes, but if you actually look at the death count, it has dropped in the past month and a half, despite re-openings: https://ga-covid19.ondemand.sas.com/ Georgia being one of the earliest states to re-open, continue to see their deaths plummet even as their case count increases. What's the reason for this? I don't know. Better testing, maybe. Maybe a less deadly version of the virus is propagating now. Not sure.

Likely people who believe they are high risk, especially older populations that aren't under any pressure to go to work, are still not taking many chances.

What I really want to see is general case severity. There's a whole range from "testing positive with no symptoms" to "bad flu" to "severe effects but not hospitalized, may have long-term damage." That last group is the scary one that, as far as I know, isn't being counted.

Re: Most employees of NYT won’t be required back in physical offices until 2021

#363

Post by mac01021 »

asdfman123 wrote: post #296
Leherenn wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why doesn't it make sense that people do not want to die (generally)?

I'm talking about a general societal lack of acceptance about death. You don't really see it as much in many other cultures.

For example?

Re: Most employees of NYT won’t be required back in physical offices until 2021

#364

Post by Klinky »

throwaway894345 wrote: post #357
Klinky wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, I don't buy the "meet in the middle" approach or the "both sides are at fault" theory. Only one side has a populist leader who's platform was to foment racism and pledged to destroy Obamacare, and basically no one is reigning him in. If anything, people are volunteering for their chance to be thrown under the bus. It's very hard to meet in the middle with the current situation. There is serious moral concern i…

I don’t know man. I don’t see how we’re going to go anywhere if we’re determined to only see the worst qualities in our opposition. Notably contrary to your point, lots of conservatives are Never Trumpers and are very unhappy about the populist turn things have taken. Anyway, if you’re interested in minimizing racism, “the middle” is where we should be. The poles are obsessed with their racial hierarchies. Moderates…

I have a hard time finding a middle ground that would have it be acceptable for people of color to be considered lesser, but this has been the status quo for decades after the civil rights act. There is no moderate position to take on the matter of racism, no meeting in the middle with those who want to uphold racist institutions or systems. Moderate behavior comes off as weak tea inaction in order to restore an unsatisfactory status quo. Both sides should have polarized views pointed towards anti-racism, it should not even be something on the table that needs to be bargained for, but that's not the case.

MLK Jr was not a moderate, and had problems with their ineffectiveness.

https://www.bustle.com/p/this-martin-luther-king-jr-quote-on...

The article is 2 years old, what was done in those two years to help prevent the outcome we're seeing now? More black men got shot by police with little to no action done about it.

Re: Most employees of NYT won’t be required back in physical offices until 2021

#365

Post by hobs »

supergeek133 wrote: post #194
marvin wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also: Culture barriers, language barriers. Even if the cheaper market speaks decent English, there will be a greater communications overhead. Also, skill compatibility. Maybe your labor pool is bigger, but so is the employer pool of everyone with world-class skills in whatever domain you're operating in.

I wish things like this mattered. I've worked for more than one company where the bulk of development happens in India. Even though we would have a 2-3 hour window in the morning US time where meetings happen, there is lack of business context, and language/skillset barriers, the cost savings is just too much to overcome.

Had a similar discussion with a tech company that was outsourcing to fairly competent developers that I figured were sandbagging because the defect rate was so high that it didnt make sense.

I talked to the director who was in charge of this and brought to light the impact on the customer base.

The response? We were paying devs on the order of 10% of what we would pay in the united states, and if they padded it to 3x it still would save us an insane amount of money.

There's nothing wrong with outsourcing per-se, but its lovely when the actual "we dont care about the customer's result" comes out of someone's mouth.

Re: Most employees of NYT won’t be required back in physical offices until 2021

#366

Post by rodgerd »

waltherg wrote: post #274
Loughla wrote: post #5

Meanwhile, my employer has said zero remote work once the state transitions into the next phase. They want to be "fair" to everyone, including those who have positions that cannot be performed remotely. So, you have a co-morbidity? Nope. You have no childcare suddenly? Nope. It's startling how stuck in the 1980's some people are. Just absolutely astonishing.

I've heard two C-level guys with two separate German SMEs say that the only part of their workforce that hadn't handled remote work well was middle management. The people doing the actual work were happy WFH and simply getting stuff done. Senior management / C-level types were content seeing sales figures and general output from afar. Middle management struggled because they had a hard time judging work estimates for…

The frozen middle is real.

Re: Most employees of NYT won’t be required back in physical offices until 2021

#367

Post by hobs »

jedberg wrote: post #270
scarface74 wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, taxes can be hard. I'm sure as remote working gets more popular, services will pop up to help with this and maybe laws will change, but right now, it's really hard to hire someone outside the US, and it's fairly complex to hire someone inside the US in state that you aren't already in. Inside the US is a solved problem. I haven't worked for a company in 20 years that did its own payroll. ADP, Insperity among ot…

It's absolutely not solved. I run a company with employees in multiple states. The payroll company takes care of some of the problems, but for example, every state has different rules about worker's comp. Most states require you to get your own, but you still have to let them know. Some states require you to buy into their state system, which requires signing up. Then there is corporate registration. Many states requ…

For what its worth payroll companies like that do exist, but they generally only work as staffing/funding companies - you pay a markup and they manage workers comp pools/state legal issues/etc (though most only have regional not national support) - unfortunately that might be worth 1.3-6% of your payroll :|

Re: Most employees of NYT won’t be required back in physical offices until 2021

#368

Post by mjevans »

Izkata wrote: post #336
throwaway894345 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is true in the same way that if a homeless person had a million dollars he might not be homeless. The trick is how to get a functioning welfare state when your government is fundamentally broken. Note that the even the CDC failed spectacularly at its primary job; its literal raison d'etre. You can criticize that the CDC lacked funding, but that is wrong[^1] and it misses the point: not being able to properly fun…

> Procuring masks and other PPE or even planning for a supply chain shortage is the cheapest, most impactful thing they could have done even without the benefit of hindsight IIRC we did have a massive stockpile of masks, but it was only discovered at the start of the pandemic that they weren't being rotated out and most/all of them had degraded too far to be safe.

Also, of course, the best way of rotating it out is to have the government buffer factory output and smooth out the supply.

Re: Most employees of NYT won’t be required back in physical offices until 2021

#369

Post by perl4ever »

chrisco255 wrote: post #227
aedocw wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It takes a while for people to die after infection. Give states like Georgia time to catch up. Their hospitals will be overwhelmed and the numbers of deaths will get there. There is no "less deadly version of the virus". Treatment protocols have improved but that has not dramatically changed the odds of at-risk folks dying.

People have been saying that now for almost two months. Georgia started to reopen April 24th. It's not registering in the data.

What isn't registering in what data? Reopening takes time to result in new cases recorded, and new cases take time to result in new deaths recorded. Reasonable estimates for the latter are about a month, and maybe the first part also took a month.

Georgia now has about 1,200 new cases daily compared to ~700 in New York. Only a month ago, New York had more like 2,000 per day.

Is it controversial that it takes about a month for new cases to turn into new deaths? Do you believe that isn't happening or won't happen in Georgia?

Re: Most employees of NYT won’t be required back in physical offices until 2021

#370

Post by perl4ever »

UncleOxidant wrote: post #268
chrisco255 wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but if you actually look at the death count, it has dropped in the past month and a half, despite re-openings: https://ga-covid19.ondemand.sas.com/ Georgia being one of the earliest states to re-open, continue to see their deaths plummet even as their case count increases. What's the reason for this? I don't know. Better testing, maybe. Maybe a less deadly version of the virus is propagating now. Not sure.

Deaths lag new cases by 2 to 3 weeks.

Reporting the deaths also takes time and some say the total is closer to a month.
Post reply on HN