161–170 of 170 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
tbh all tabs seem like a deficiency in the window management paradigm to me. Instead of tabs our WMs should just allow us to easily list and transition between all windows of an app.
I can’t imagine working with a browser without tabs.
The reason why things get worse is because of systemic problems: misaligned incentives, information asymmetry, diffuse responsibility, etc. It's actually hard to improve these aspects of large systems. Hence, why the world is an imperfect place.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A little while ago I ran Windows XP in a VM, inside Windows 10. I noted that when I pressed the start key, the start menu opened. I noted that when I pressed Win+E, an explorer window opened. Fully rendered. After a single video frame. On Windows 10, the same thing happens, only several hundred milliseconds later, and then you get to enjoy watching the UI elements get painted in one at a time. Twenty years of progres…
I'm forced to use the Microsoft ecosystem at work and the sluggishness of it is a major source of procrastination. I find myself putting off small tasks forever, because waiting for word files to open, browsing folder structures in Teams, etc. are all mildly painful experiences. I suspect a lot of people do this, and maybe all of them don't even realize why they are doing this. The effect of sluggish user interfaces…
You put it on your desktop and (assuming you have a browser running) instantly brings up a text editor that can only load and save.
If you feel you need some feature you edit the html file and add the code yourself. (Preferably using text-edit)
Unlimited capabilities:)
In a similar vein, I've argued in many a corporate meeting that there's no such thing as "empowerment". People start out wanting to achieve things, change things to be better, do a good job. The active issue is disempowerment , created by other people (usually but not always senior) within the organisation. So the question isn't "how to empower people", but rather "how to prevent disempowerment of people". This isn't…
Like all generalizations, this is only partly true. There are bad actors.
> The active issue is disempowerment, created by other people (usually but not always senior) within the organisation.
Disempowerment (is that a word?) is necessary. So necessary, that entire departments incorporate it as a large part of their mandate. HR, finance, QA...
> So the question isn't "how to empower people", but rather "how to prevent disempowerment of people".
Or more, how to focus the disempowerment on things that matter?
> This isn't always popular, as it shifts the focus and responsibility for different behaviour away from the disempowered rank and file, towards the dysfunctional leadership.
Maybe it's not always popular because some disempowerment is necessary, and framing the entire issue as a necessity for its removal and those who disagree as dysfunctional is needlessly inflammatory and counterproductive?
In a similar vein, I've argued in many a corporate meeting that there's no such thing as "empowerment". People start out wanting to achieve things, change things to be better, do a good job. The active issue is disempowerment , created by other people (usually but not always senior) within the organisation. So the question isn't "how to empower people", but rather "how to prevent disempowerment of people". This isn't…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
tbh all tabs seem like a deficiency in the window management paradigm to me. Instead of tabs our WMs should just allow us to easily list and transition between all windows of an app.
I can’t imagine working with a browser without tabs.
Shouldn't that just be your OS? It should show a list of open windows, allow you to group them and switch between windows within a group, show side by side etc
In a similar vein, I've argued in many a corporate meeting that there's no such thing as "empowerment". People start out wanting to achieve things, change things to be better, do a good job. The active issue is disempowerment , created by other people (usually but not always senior) within the organisation. So the question isn't "how to empower people", but rather "how to prevent disempowerment of people". This isn't…
> People start out wanting to achieve things, change things to be better, do a good job. Like all generalizations, this is only partly true. There are bad actors. > The active issue is disempowerment, created by other people (usually but not always senior) within the organisation. Disempowerment (is that a word?) is necessary. So necessary, that entire departments incorporate it as a large part of their mandate. HR,…
Of course, but in the organisations I have experience of, I'd estimate that the 'bad actor' rate is very low - certainly a low-single-digit percentage. (I don't work in tech, BTW.)
> Disempowerment (is that a word?) is necessary. So necessary, that entire departments incorporate it as a large part of their mandate. HR, finance, QA...
I think we need to differentiate between different forms of disempowerment. For example, having a set budget to work within (i.e. the disempowerment that a finance department might generate) is structural in nature; and further may either be empowering if an individual or team has freedom to work within those constraints, or disempowering if the budget is too constrained, or changes unpredictably. In contrast, smart committed people having their ideas stamped on irrationally by a bad egotistical leader ultimately leads to disenchanted people who don't want to invest their energy any more.
> Maybe it's not always popular because some disempowerment is necessary, and framing the entire issue as a necessity for its removal and those who disagree as dysfunctional is needlessly inflammatory and counterproductive?
You're maybe not considering the background context of why such a discussion would even be taking place. These discussions spring out of leadership noting somehow (direct observations, discussions, workplace surveys, workplace transformation initiatives, etc.) that people in their organisations are less "empowered" than they (leadership) would wish (with perceived negative impacts) and therefore this is something they want to reverse. They're frustrated and confused: they think they're offering an environment for people to behave as they hope to see, and yet people aren't stepping through the apparently open door.
It's unpopular because asking why people are disempowered shifts the focus from the failings of individuals ("why is this employee not behaving as I expect them to; what stick or lever or additional incentive can I use to improve their behaviour?") to the failings of leadership ("what have I been doing wrong all along to result in this sorry state of affairs? Am I the cause?")
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> People start out wanting to achieve things, change things to be better, do a good job. Like all generalizations, this is only partly true. There are bad actors. > The active issue is disempowerment, created by other people (usually but not always senior) within the organisation. Disempowerment (is that a word?) is necessary. So necessary, that entire departments incorporate it as a large part of their mandate. HR,…
> Like all generalizations, this is only partly true. There are bad actors. Of course, but in the organisations I have experience of, I'd estimate that the 'bad actor' rate is very low - certainly a low-single-digit percentage. (I don't work in tech, BTW.) > Disempowerment (is that a word?) is necessary. So necessary, that entire departments incorporate it as a large part of their mandate. HR, finance, QA... I think…
You would hope a light bulb would turn on, but management who needs those sorts of conversations might often not have the wherewithal to do the right thing, never mind respond positively.
> Curiosity isn’t simply what’s left after a complete education. It’s still there if the system doesn’t ruin it. Yes, but also some people are shockingly incurious and approach academia and life through a depressingly hollow transactional lens from the beginning. Though if it was there to begin with, there's a good chance it'll be stripped away through the structuring of courses to be measurable first and intriguing…
> some people are shockingly incurious and approach academia and life through a depressingly hollow transactional lens from the beginning I feel like that's a result of prior bad experience. Noone goes into university, or even primary school a blank slate. It's very easy to fall into a trap where education is transactional if that's what was modelled to you or that's how previous teachers treated you
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Explorer now has tabs. I don't need tabs Hey now! The `nautilus' file browser on linux got me hooked on tabs and for years it's been a glaring deficiency of File Explorer. Many tasks involve a collection of directories, and tabs can be ideal for reducing demand for screen space. I concede the the current Windows implementation is poor but I hope they improve it, rather than dumping tabs entirely.
tbh all tabs seem like a deficiency in the window management paradigm to me. Instead of tabs our WMs should just allow us to easily list and transition between all windows of an app.