Hacker News Reader

> If you ask the question "what will happen if I ignore this policy", and the answer is not "I will get a pay cut" or "I will get fired," then the policy in question isn't actually a policy. It's just a suggestion.

I like to phrase this as "never think you need permission to do a good job", but it's ever so true.

"It's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission." is one of the more well-known variants of that.

Oft espoused at Microsoft BUT, as I found out, that one case where I ordered an extra $150 whiteboard for my office without first going to my manager resulted in a really stern rebuke.

The stern rebuke is part of the thing.

You pretend to forget about the policy, and they pretend to tell you off for it, and you pretend to be remorseful.

It sucks, but it's the effective way to do business in a bureaucracy.

Managers manage resources which usually means strict control over them in an mbas or old mind: even if the whiteboard was $1 that you did not ask them is their issue. This of course has no place in innovative companies.

Given all the under-the-radar, play-it-fast-and-loose stuff I was encouraged to do there, I was quite surprised by the episode. This was just after the consent decree came down and the whole place become very risk-averse practically overnight.

Yeah -- probably only a handful of companies put their money and practice where their mouth is -- aka not a micromanagers' heaven. It is part of the process of a company's death if the company is in the innovation/tech sector.

My spouse teaches in a school that is an isolated area between hills and has so little cell signal that teachers are forced to go outside and stand in a particular part of the parking lot and wave their phones around to transmit or receive a text message, let alone a phone call.

District IT policy prohibits teachers from connecting their phones to the school wifi network (along with many other frivolously absurd IT policies).

For three years, I have sent email to various administrators, including to the school superintendent, pointing out how dangerous it is for teachers to have no cell signal, especially if there is an emergency such as an active shooter or whatever. Beyond a polite response promising that it'll will be "looked in to," nothing has come of my messages.

Last week, teachers across the district were told that they are soon to be required to use 2FA using their personal cell phones to authenticate to the school network for email, grading software, etc.

I have no idea how this will be able to work at her school.

It always makes me wonder when businesses expect people to use their personal devices for a business service.

I know everyone has a phone nowadays but the business should really be paying at least part of the cost for those devices.

Same with working from home.

Yeah, I don't care about the hassle of having two phones... If you want me to use a business mandated software, give me a phone or another alternative. Work software won't be on my phone.

2FA using an authenticator app doesn’t need a network connection. If they mean 2FA by receiving text messages, then it could of course.

School administrators aren’t capable of giving you more cell signal though. Those microcells don’t work that well and are specific to your carrier, I think? Complain to the carrier.

I realize that the district cannot fix the signal strength but needs to bring some political strength in complaining to the carriers.

The 2FA is text but should be authenticator.

I still don't follow why they would elect to install a cell repeater rather than fix the fire alarm. One of the two sounds like a good way to get in jail for embezzling public funds; I certainly don't like the idea of my public tax money going towards unapproved repeaters (if the employees pooled together their own money or something, more power to them). On the other hand, no judge/jury is going to convict for fixing the fire alarm whether the money was authorized or not.

"You have to learn why things work on a starship."

The building itself is "owned" by a separate part of the government than the part that actually sits in it (and this is almost always true, no matter what part of the government you're talking about). As a consequence, getting the building fixed requires coordinating someone else's budget and personnel. Whereas installing unofficial cell repeaters can come out of your own budget, specifically because they're unofficial.

Yeah I get that the convoluted arms of .gov are entangled to the point they strangle themselves; what I don't understand is why can't the unofficial budget be used to fix the fire alarm? It's not like the fire alarm guy is gonna ask for the deed to the building. I could probably get a fire alarm guy to come to the local coffee shop if I wanted and no one would even know the difference.

Chances are there is a department in the other arm of the gov't whose job it is to manage those, and who is going to look bad if you fix it yourself, and they'll get angry. Seen it happen.

It seems like an appropriate use of funds to me. The dude's working in a windowless office, it's not like they have hot tubs and strippers in there.

There are definitely worse uses of public funds.

No official mobile phone ?

For top management, sure. For regular grade employees? No.