brianary

joined 2 years ago
[–] brianary@startrek.website 31 points 11 months ago

Like sending a few choice SCOTUS judges to gitmo

[–] brianary@startrek.website 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

This will be the basis of a wildly disproportionate, violent response aimed at anyone they want.

[–] brianary@startrek.website 1 points 11 months ago

No, they will only want dissent bans.

[–] brianary@startrek.website 1 points 11 months ago

Where did they cancel? Running only one (incumbent) candidate doesn't really count.

[–] brianary@startrek.website 4 points 11 months ago

To be fair, it used to be a much better, more relevant site, which I only remember because I've been around since forever too.

[–] brianary@startrek.website 21 points 11 months ago

A job is not a social club. You may need a mix of personality types, but if you lock yourself into a candidate pool from a tight geographic area, that'll be far more constraining.

You can't just make up a percentage based on anecdotal observation and expect anyone to take it seriously.

Generally, my online meetings work great. When there's lag, or for low-priority or asynchronous points, we use the text channel. No interruption. That's not really available in person. It also allows more input from thoughtful introverts, which typically get steamrolled and ignored in person.

[–] brianary@startrek.website 4 points 11 months ago (2 children)

How do you not know boingboing.net?

Anyway, that's not the source, but Rawstory doesn't allow ad-blockers, so I linked that synopsis.

https://www.rawstory.com/rs-exclusive/biden-debate-2668724330/

None of those, including my link, is accurate enough to really matter, especially this far from the election.

[–] brianary@startrek.website 10 points 11 months ago (5 children)

I'm not sure I'd put much stock in modern polling.

A study suggests the debate had very little impact, but even if it didn't, historically, changing candidates this late hasn't worked out.

https://boingboing.net/2024/07/10/impacts-of-the-presidential-debate-far-overestimated.html

[–] brianary@startrek.website 23 points 11 months ago (2 children)

There is work like construction, transportation, and customer service that can't really be remote.

I'm not sure if there's a good argument for work that can be done remotely to insist on both in person and remote work. It doubles the amount of workstation resources required, or compromises on at least one of them.

Maybe teams benefit from in-person communication? That's probably simpler for some that haven't found comparable online versions of whiteboarding tools or whatever. Good tools do exist, but feel people that haven't adapted to them by now, it'll take some real demand to make it happen. This might not be a characteristic of a highly effective team, though.

Most frequently, hybrid insistence seems do be more about justifying middle management, based on my highly unscientific observations.

[–] brianary@startrek.website 6 points 11 months ago

To be fair, that was the whole point of Civil War.

[–] brianary@startrek.website 1 points 11 months ago

They see it as pragmatism, I think.

[–] brianary@startrek.website 6 points 11 months ago (2 children)

It's banning porn.

view more: ‹ prev next ›