101–110 of 203 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would it be a benefit?
Because you don’t have to cram 2 new desks into the expensive 1 bedroom apartment you share with your partner.
Without the commute suburbs or smaller cities offer much bigger and better spaces for less. Why pay $4.5k for that one bedroom in SOMA when you can get a 4 bedroom home in Sacramento for the same price.
We've only been doing mass WFH for a year. Many companies have been saying things very similar to Coinbase, but I'm not sure if long-term mass WFH will prove to that great (for the company, I'd argue it certainly won't be great for the average worker).
I agree, 1 year is very short time. We might see the effects of WFH policy even after 5 years or so, positive or negative.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One thing the average worker should watch out for is companies who perform geographically adjustment pay scales. Some WFH companies now even list that as a benefit that they do not do these type of adjustments. I'm not sure what the best answer is to that but feel many are using it as an excuse to pay workers less.
Why wouldn't companies use WFH for their own benefit? They are businesses. I find it weird that western workers somehow imagine that WFH means that they can happily work remote but not compete with other remote workers. The fact is that their big value-add has been the physical contact with the employer, as employers want to interact with their employees f2f for god knows what reason.
(Obviously things can get trickier across national borders, but that falls under the "with no issues" clause.)
We've only been doing mass WFH for a year. Many companies have been saying things very similar to Coinbase, but I'm not sure if long-term mass WFH will prove to that great (for the company, I'd argue it certainly won't be great for the average worker).
One thing the average worker should watch out for is companies who perform geographically adjustment pay scales. Some WFH companies now even list that as a benefit that they do not do these type of adjustments. I'm not sure what the best answer is to that but feel many are using it as an excuse to pay workers less.
At an individual scale, you have to pay enough to convince the person to join your company over their other options. Their set of other options is still heavily influenced by geography, so geography is a always factor in the negotiation.
On a global scale, developer compensation in the US is an outlier, and not just in expensive cities like SF. If you truly want pay equality, you have two options: Either raise everyone’s pay to That of the most expensive market you want to hire in, or simply exclude the expensive markets from your hiring plans so you can bring the number down.
Ignoring geography in compensation discussions sounds great, until you realize that they end game is reversion to the global mean, which means most US salaries would have to come down. Way down.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dumb question: How is such a block even effective? What keeps you from creating a temporary wallet outside Coinbase, sending your funds there from Coinbase and then sending the funds from the wallet to the blocked address?
Nothing keeps you from doing that, but Coinbase can easily detect that after the fact, and then ban you from using their service.
But I find it interesting that they do this even though they technically can't know if the intermediate address was really under your control. Wouldn't this make any transaction out of Coinbase inherently risky? Like, if I were a troll that wanted to get as many Coinbase accounts banned as possible, could I simply set up a service that accepts payment at a specific bitcoin address, then immediately pass on all payments to a blocked address - and have everyone who uses my service auto-banned from Coinbase?
It makes sense though that tracing the transaction chains can be a reliable way to find repeat offenders. If your transaction history shows a consistent pattern of "your account -> some random intermediate addresses -> blocked address" then there is reason for suspicion. No one has that much bad luck.
Should probably qualify this as "geographically decentralized". As long as there are C-level executives, VPs, and the usual corporate heirarchy, they're not really decentralized in the sense that cryptocurrency itself is fully consensus-driven.
> As long as there are C-level executives, VPs, and the usual corporate heirarchy, they're not really decentralized in the sense that cryptocurrency itself is fully consensus-driven. Is that the best litmus test? My impression is that Valve is decentralized and self-organizing company[1] even though Gabe still has a "President" title. In any case, it's quite an achievement to lie twice in a relatively short title. It…
TLDR: "Welcome To Flatland" is Valve marketing and it doesn't hurt to take it with a grain of salt.
https://www.pcgamer.com/valves-flat-structure-contains-hidde...
https://medium.com/dunia-media/the-nightmare-of-valves-self-...
Keep in mind: The average tenure for big-tech employees is less than 3 years -- and usually more like 2 years [1]. We were all abruptly pushed into WFH due to the circumstances. It's perfectly logical to embrace this status quo, and then just gradually transition back to the office (in full or in part) as the dust settles. [1] https://www.businessinsider.com/average-employee-tenure-rete...
Keep in mind: The average tenure for big-tech employees is less than 3 years -- and usually more like 2 years [1]. We were all abruptly pushed into WFH due to the circumstances. It's perfectly logical to embrace this status quo, and then just gradually transition back to the office (in full or in part) as the dust settles. [1] https://www.businessinsider.com/average-employee-tenure-rete...
The future is hybrid. Not all people would go back to office that often, making office less important, and company would spend less on office benefits. This is a self-enforcing feedback loop.