|
space marine todd posted:Cross-functional brainstorming and user feedback sessions are far more effective in person than online. Without them, the people "who do the work" are going to be building the wrong thing. There is a major difference between collaboration and meetings. I have one on one or two fifteen minute conversations all the time. I refuse to have multiple group meetings per week each having 7+ people for several hours a day. I agree that the guy just sitting in the corner going off on his own whim is usually one of the first to go, but there's a huge gradient.
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 20:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 12:31 |
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:There is a major difference between collaboration and meetings. I have one on one or two fifteen minute conversations all the time. I refuse to have multiple group meetings per week each having 7+ people for several hours a day. God, I wish I could live in a world where meetings didn't run my life. The higher I have gone up the tech company ladder, the less time I have done to do the work I need to do. Right now, I am in meetings for at least 6 hours a day, with some hell days being 9 hours of meetings straight. The collaborative meetings rule, but then I don't have any time left to actually transform the outputs from those collaborations into work for the engineers to do. I would love a solution that got rid of those meetings, but without them, things would be even worse than they already are.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 20:18
|
|
|
space marine todd posted:Cross-functional brainstorming and user feedback sessions are far more effective in person than online. Without them, the people "who do the work" are going to be building the wrong thing. A greater emphasis on remote work (even if it's only a 3-4 days out of the week) is probably going to end up being a necessary component of any long-term climate solution, so I'm not really sure how you reconcile this.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 20:24
|
|
|
space marine todd posted:God, I wish I could live in a world where meetings didn't run my life. The higher I have gone up the tech company ladder, the less time I have done to do the work I need to do. Right now, I am in meetings for at least 6 hours a day, with some hell days being 9 hours of meetings straight. The collaborative meetings rule, but then I don't have any time left to actually transform the outputs from those collaborations into work for the engineers to do. That's my nightmare. We limit the big meetings to 1.5 hours max once per week. I have smaller meetings with 1-3 people with one hour max peppered throughout the week. It is really about having meetings with purpose and only including those that actually need to be there. I've said no to so many meetings because it has no functional purpose other than waste my time. The other critical part is follow up communication. If your small meetings produce something that is relevant to another group of team, you need to be able to get that info to others in a manner that doesn't require a meeting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 20:26
|
|
|
MickeyFinn posted:I have found that the number of meetings skyrockets when the people in charge are not qualified to be in charge, so meetings keep happening to tell them what to do and how to do it. It frequently gets framed as "communication," but the reality is that they don't understand the work being done well enough to make independent decisions. A qualified manager who is competent at management can sort the work among the workers, manage the schedule, and then help it get done via email/phone/text, but the unqualified manager has to keep asking why task X isn't done already or why we should care about Y. I've gone through a series of managers and project managers lately, and this describes perfectly the difference between the ones who were pretty technical but in a managing role and those who were not technical and probably failed into their managing role. Delta-Wye fucked around with this message at 21:16 on Aug 1, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 20:27
|
|
|
space marine todd posted:God, I wish I could live in a world where meetings didn't run my life. The higher I have gone up the tech company ladder, the less time I have done to do the work I need to do. Right now, I am in meetings for at least 6 hours a day, with some hell days being 9 hours of meetings straight. The collaborative meetings rule, but then I don't have any time left to actually transform the outputs from those collaborations into work for the engineers to do. Work for a smaller company. Pretty much every job I was in got to the point where I couldn't realistically be relied on for any IC work (I'd have some productive days, but most were 6-7 hours of meetings). Now I run tech for a 5 person company with no intent of getting too much bigger, and it's great (maybe 3 hours a week of meetings) Barring that, especially if you are high up in the food chain, eliminate waste from meetings. Absolutely refuse to participate in any meeting that is more about disseminating information than making decisions. If a meeting doesn't have an agenda, and that agenda doesn't include genuine decisions to be made that you have input on, say no. Demand all materials being presented at the meeting are distributed beforehand with an expectation that people are reading them (if you're running the meeting, ask at the beginning of the meeting. If after a few times, people still aren't reading notes, ask them each individually). If that doesn't work, mandate 10 silent minutes at the beginning of meetings for people to quietly read the meeting material. This can be super political for sure, but start with meetings that you have control over. I guarantee if there's no one who outranks you in the meeting, people will be appreciative rather than combative about it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 21:10
|
|
|
enki42 posted:Work for a smaller company. Pretty much every job I was in got to the point where I couldn't realistically be relied on for any IC work (I'd have some productive days, but most were 6-7 hours of meetings). Now I run tech for a 5 person company with no intent of getting too much bigger, and it's great (maybe 3 hours a week of meetings) Sounds like you need Robert's Rules!
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 21:12
|
|
|
One of my long time friends has been working at Facebook (on contract) for awhile and definitely goes cold when I mention how them and other platforms (but especially Facebook) are specifically profiting off of the death of democracy. His response to radicalizing psychos by feeding them endless disinformation typically manifests along the lines of ‘well these are inherent flaws in human nature’. But it’s like...you’re working to profit off of that. Sure you’re being exploited for your labor on top of that too. He’s a pretty nice person and grateful for the gig but it’s really becoming a problem for me to pretend like I’m not kinda disgusted by it. Am I giving too much of a poo poo for somebody low on the pole trying to make a buck? Or do I need to have to talk to him like that older therapist who gave Carmela Soprano the business? Kart Barfunkel fucked around with this message at 00:36 on Aug 2, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2020 00:32
|
|
|
Nah you're absolutely right. Facebook is vile poo poo. I think you can safely wait it out tho. They will definitely screw him over sooner or later and then he'll agree with you.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2020 00:41
|
|
|
does your friend still think theyre doing even a nnon zero amount of good? at least drugdealers and some other criminals , or casino bosses know and admit that yeah they profit off a vice.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2020 01:06
|
|
|
Sodomy Hussein posted:- In the new forced working from home model in tech, I've talked to multiple people who realize how little it is they're actually responsible to do. This certainly doesn't hold true across everything, but if you've only got 2-4 hours of actual work to do a day you'll become very cognizant of that via drastically reduced meetings, no time spent at the cafeteria, and so on. I'm in a senior technical role. I work a few tickets but mainly do project work. Meetings go 2-3 hours most days, usually useful information sharing or "we're planning the project that will consume the next two years of your life, you should be there" stuff. I also take escalations from the lab support team, so I'm basically on-call 8-5. I don't get naps. Sometimes I have to ignore chat just to cook lunch. I'm going to quote our CEO from yesterday's executive committee call. "That's not working from home, that's living at work." This is more stressful during the workday, but I am more productive. And I'm only on-campus once or twice a week so that cuts out a lot of Covid concerns and saves me 6-8 hours a week on the commute. On the whole, I'm busier and getting more done. I can cope, I'll keep it up when "normal" resumes, whatever that looks like.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2020 02:44
|
|
|
NaanViolence posted:Nah you're absolutely right. Facebook employees are vile poo poo. Got you
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2020 02:53
|
|
|
I wonder if BBS:s had people complaining how these newfangled Usenets newsgroups and IRC networks were shamelessly enabling pedos and terrorists.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2020 09:35
|
|
|
They definitely did enable pedos (I have no idea about terrorists). I'm sure people complained about them, but there wasn't any centralized control of Usenet or IRC to point at as a villain, and the internet and really society at large back then probably had more of a libertarian streak (in the personal liberty sense, not the "lovely conservatives" sense).
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2020 11:59
|
|
|
Yeah the comparison is disingenuous at best because prior platforms were never driven by the radioactive bullshit that is advertising. When number go up is predicated on ANYTHING goes then obviously you're going to become the worst pedophilia networks in history.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2020 23:43
|
|
|
^ Yeah, that's also a good point. Usenet and IRC were passive - lovely stuff existed but you had to make an effort to find it. Social networks / Youtube are often engineered specifically to radicalize people (not in an intentional sense, but if you write algorithms that maximize time on site above anything else, you're going to draw people into extreme content).
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2020 13:40
|
|
|
enki42 posted:^ Yeah, that's also a good point. Usenet and IRC were passive - lovely stuff existed but you had to make an effort to find it. Social networks / Youtube are often engineered specifically to radicalize people (not in an intentional sense, but if you write algorithms that maximize time on site above anything else, you're going to draw people into extreme content). ENGAGEMENT MUST GO UP MORE CLICKS MORE USERS
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2020 14:31
|
|
|
Three concise emails would definitely not get read considering I get about 80 emails a day and it's all crap I don't care about.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2020 17:27
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/MikeIsaac/status/1290787759406190592
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2020 00:15
|
|
|
Well, that's more time than any copper has had to serve for murdering a black person in cold blood. Not that that's a very high standard to measure against, I suppose.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2020 05:52
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:If I have to convince a professional to do their loving job via meetings, there's no way I'm staying at that workplace. There's almost zero reasons for in person meetings in today's workplace. People that want to meet all the time don't actually have much work to do and are likely useless PMC types. no, meetings should be approached as a tool to convince other people to give a poo poo about the thing you want them to do, because they don't intrinsically care about your job any more than you (apparently) care about theirs. this is called dealing with other humans who are different to you and have other concerns. additional secret trick to controlling outcomes: be the one who takes minutes of the meeting - keep 'em to one laptop screen long - and send them around afterwards. whoever takes the minutes, runs the company. you can get a lot done if you don't worry too hard about who gets the credit. about 50% of my job as a sysadmin is, one way or another, public relations. i realise the next stage is only being allowed to do meetings and use excel, but ...
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2020 15:10
|
|
|
But why would we hire PMs if the journalists do it for us for free?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2020 19:51
|
|
|
Shugojin posted:But why would we hire PMs if the journalists do it for us for free? Sorry, the feature was in Alpha Early Access. Our next major patch is scheduled for 04NOV2020, so stay tuned for new and improved content!
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2020 19:55
|
|
|
Oh good, I'm sure this is just another "bug" as well. https://twitter.com/CraigSilverman/status/1291437989101543424
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2020 20:26
|
|
|
im shocked
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2020 21:50
|
|
|
Facebook is desperate to convince people they’re not fash, they’re just Sideshow Bob stepping on rakes over and over. Oops! Oops! Haha whoops!
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2020 23:28
|
|
|
The judge in the California case has ordered Uber and Lyft to classify drivers as employees https://twitter.com/jeremybwhite/status/1292917699190747136?s=21 aware of dog fucked around with this message at 22:28 on Aug 10, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 22:26
|
|
|
aware of dog posted:The judge in the California case has ordered Uber and Lyft to classify drivers as employees That's gotta be a stake to the heart if it holds up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 22:39
|
|
|
...a pro-worker policy happening in 2020? I'm shocked.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 23:31
|
|
|
Terrorism works
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 00:03
|
|
|
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-53718541 So twitter bought vine, shuttered it because they couldn't figure out a way to monetise it, and now they are thinking about buying tik tok? How is this going to be different?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 09:30
|
|
|
They shuttered vine to silence undesirables and deny them a platform/cultural cachet. Assume malice at all times.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 09:48
|
|
|
quote:The attack, carried out on the ground and from private aircraft, destroyed more than 35 square blocks of the district—at that time the wealthiest black community in the United States, known as "Black Wall Street".
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 10:49
|
|
|
poemdexter posted:Three concise emails would definitely not get read considering I get about 80 emails a day and it's all crap I don't care about. Years ago I came back from a two week vacation to over 2 thousand emails. My boss began screaming at me by noon asking about why I hadn't responded yet to emails somewhere in the middle of that pile and I found a new job and left ASAP after that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 12:14
|
|
|
Big Hubris posted:They shuttered vine to silence undesirables and deny them a platform/cultural cachet. Assume malice at all times. What is your evidence for this? Tech companies buy apps then shutter them because they can't make a profit off it all the time. I really doubt that Vine was different because Twitter wanted to "silence undesirables". https://www.theverge.com/2016/10/28/13456208/why-vine-died-twitter-shutdown Ruffian Price posted:Probably in bad taste to equate the two but the reasoning is pretty much the same. How DARE they thrive in a community. I would say that this is more a problem with creating communities on apps that the community does not actually own. The survival of the app is always at the mercy of its owners and the market. It's like building a house in an area where there are a bunch of hidden sinkholes, so you never know if your house will get swallowed up. And of course people are encouraged to build there without being told of all the sinkholes. The end of Vine, regardless of the intent by Twitter, makes a case for publicly owned or open source apps. Move these apps (or the communities built on top of them) out of the market to more solid ground so they can't get swallowed up overnight. America Inc. fucked around with this message at 17:00 on Aug 11, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 16:53
|
|
|
Mega Comrade posted:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-53718541 Uh sell the data
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 16:54
|
|
|
Big Hubris posted:They shuttered vine to silence undesirables and deny them a platform/cultural cachet. Assume malice at all times. they bought it because they wanted to eliminate a potential competitor Mega Comrade posted:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-53718541 twitter is perfectly happy with paying for tictok to be dead
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 16:57
|
|
|
Jack is a Nazi and Vine was popular with minorities. If monetizing Vine was such a big deal, they should've figured that out before buying it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 19:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 12:31 |
|
|
Vine was killed for the same reason some shows get cancelled despite high ratings. The demographic was large, but unprofitable for selling ads against. So, yes, it was killed because it was popular with minorities, but rather than direct malice it was because Twitter wants huge ad deals with well known brands, whereas with a minority audience you need many more smaller advertisers and you need to target more effectively. This is another case of invisible, systemic racism in the US economy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 19:52
|
|
