341–350 of 351 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t think it’s really about the clothes being uncomfortable, but just the idea of being forced to wear certain kinds of clothes
Plus the expense of maintaining two different wardrobes.
To defend myself a bit, though, most conversations I see around this topic are referring to comfort.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hot-take, it was never NOT cool to blast open offices. Unless you're in middle management.
I worked briefly for a transportation company helping with a migration to Solaris. I was the FNG, and everyone else was primarily Windows so I stuck out like a sore thumb. My manager (and his manager) were really nice but had experienced a bit of turnover. My first day showed why. All of the sysadmins worked from one room, with a "datacenter" in the room next door. Imagine a single room, with desks lined up around th…
They weren't so loud, but those older ones, yeah I remember them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It might be shocking to realize that not all body types fit well into a suit, regardless of how well tailored it is. I used to be tall and lanky, great for a suit. Then age happened, and now I'm much more round that beanpole. Nothing fits well, and I've tried custom shirts etc. I just look like a well dressed, round person. I'm not more comfortable at all, in fact the opposite. Plop me in a pair of shorts with a t-sh…
Interesting. I've been told that the suit is so ubiquitous over history and nationalities, because it flatters older and portly gentlemen more than other items.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Taking ten minute screenshots is not a good practice. Why not just measure on output or have regular meetings? What kind of job requires ten minute screenshots? Definitely not a software development job.
I've watched the screenshots 3 times in 2 years when someone has been missing deadlines and failing to explaining why for several weeks in a row. I employee people from all over the world. Some of them have real problems. A guy from Venezuela got his computer fried from an electrical surge. I asked him a lot of proof and he did provide it immediately. It was all true and I bought him a new laptop. Another guy from Me…
But in general, the problem with surveillance is that it is just all about appearances. People usually learn to "look" busy instead of being productive and that is counter-productive to actual productivity when people are just pre-occupied with appearances.
Another problem is that it creates an atmosphere of low trust in the company. When there is an atmosphere of low trust, people will be less motivated to work hard and to give their whole effort since they will feel they are just expendable since the manager doesn't trust them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
65k (General Motors) was the lowest offer I saw as a new grad in 2019. Everything else was above 75k. I took a job for 90k. I work in Texas.
Then you’re lucky.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Pretty much we spent the vast majority of the day figuring out what to do when, instead of actually doing it. One could argue that we virtually never do actual work. Machines or remote workers do. All we are doing is defining, communicating and controlling others' work.
That's arguably also work.
My point is collaboration (aka "figuring out what to do when") is pretty much the essence of our work. It is machines or remote workers that are "actually doing it", as I believe GP means it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've never understood this. If you work from home you can also just... go walking outside? In fact you could even go walking for longer, since nobody is checking for your presence and you haven't wasted time commuting. I'd rather walk to the lake and go for a swim during the afternoon, than walk to a train to walk to an office.
>> I'd rather walk to the lake and go for a swim during the afternoon, than walk to a train to walk to an office. This requires some degree of motivation. When you had to go to the office you were forced to get dressed, get outside and travel etc. When you are WFH it is so tempting to get up late, get online, and stay comfortable. This is true even when you know what you are doing is unhealthy. It's similar to people…
I work a four-day week (80% time, not imagining 4-10s) as a software engineer at a non-profit academic organization. For a paycut basically, I make 80% of what I think of as my "actual" salary. I have managed to do this at a succession of several jobs now. When I briefly tried to go back to 5 days, it was really hard. It seems insane to me now that anyone works 5 days a week. (And I do know plenty of people work even…
What is 4-10s?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How many got wind of your surveillance policies and never bothered to apply? How many sensed your attitude towards your employees in the interview and took a different offer? How many spoke to one of your employees after the interview and then ghosted you? You can't measure the potentially wide-ranging negative impacts of your attitude and policies.
We are a startup of 6 people and we do international hires from different countries. So practically certainly no 2 candidates we've ever interviewed knew each other. You assume we are a big startup with a big budget and all problems that come with it. Ask questions next time.
If you need to take 10-minute screenshots while your company only has 6 people, you've got the wrong 6 people and you're going to fail. At that stage you can't afford to have anyone who isn't pulling their weight.
If you're taking 10 minute screenshots with six people and don't need to do so, you're still going to fail, but it will be because you drove away your founding team.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You assume everyone is self-oriented and wants to be autonomous and have a great work ethics and care about their privacy. No, they assume that people who are self-oriented and want to be autonomous and have a great work ethic are the people that you want to have working for you. You don't need to employ "everyone", you just need enough for your workload, and you will need fewer people if you optimize your company'…
The number of people on the planet is limited. Maybe you work in a venture backed startup and you hire people with a yearly salary of 100k or more. The rest of the startups from other locations and less funding will choose less talented people with a lower budget salary. The people you are hiring with great salaries have been educated with great effort and cost and rules previously by someone else.
When you don't have money, you can compensate in other ways, like autonomy and work-life balance. You may not get the best of the best, but you'll get loyal employees who appreciate the flexibility you give them.
Alternatively you can try to build a company on the backs of people who you have to micromanage and who will be gone in a year (and if not, only stick around because they have no other options). I'll leave it to you to decide which is more likely to succeed.