305 karma · joined March 19, 2018
We had two corgis and my wife made all their meals by hand. Part of their diet was apples, but we found one of the corgis would almost always eat around the apple (usually just a cheap red apple) pieces and leave them for the other dog. Then one time Granny Smith apples were cheaper at the grocery store so that is what we purchased and provided. He ate them up!
Turns out the dog just didn't like the sweeter apples and wanted the tart tang of a good Granny Smith.
1) what other priorities?
2) has anyone that worked on teams actually used it? It has one of the worst UX's ever.
That's a valid point, but having everyone back in the office isn't the only solution to that problem. It may be the best solution, but seems like the easiest rather than the best.
I don't have any math to support my belief just a little bit of logic, but it works like this: 1) 787 burns X lbs of fuel per hour in flight 2) 787 takes Y hours to fly from point A to point B at Mach 0.85 3) X lbs of fuel * Y hours = Z polution 4) Boom burns Xf lbs of fule per hour in flight (could actually be less because it's smaller or could be higher because of additional needed thrust) 5) Boom takes Y.85 to fly from point A to point B at Mach 1 6) (Xf) of fuel (Y*.85) hours = H pollution
So as long H is less than Z then Boom would be decreasing the impact on the environment. Now I know that there are a lot of missing numbers in here like passenger count production impacts, etc. But the solution you seem to imply is that flight just shouldn't happen and I'm not sure this is an option so if Boom can reduce the amount of pollution created by flying then it seems like something you should be for not against.
I look to the UK as an example. The government only guarantees $10,000 in student loans so most programs coincidentally cost less than $10,000. Are there exceptions? Yes, but for the most part this holds true.
Not a complete solution but does significantly help to address the blank check issue.
Now I'm starting on a daily logging package.
The real failure of stack ranking is it never ends, so at some point you are firing good employees.
I'm not going to risk losing my employment, but I'm going to tell them I have a problem using the service without a VPN. If they are willing to fire you for raising privacy concerns then you should have concerns over the culture. Plus most companies I've worked for always want the VPN connected when you are off their network.
This also looks great because it's not a subscription. But it also doesn't have many features, which is why the price is so great.
What the site doesn't show is how much customization I can create. I might be showing my age, but I miss shareware, the ability to try a software out before I buy it. Of course I think I still have Q-Crack floating around somewhere so...
Especially when we first moved into the office the VPs loved to take the customers on a tour and stand at the top of the space and tell them how great this open office was. I was in a bad mood one time when this happened and the VP asked me if I agreed (with the customer) and I said, "it is perfect for what it was built for, it was built to show our customers how many resources we have and to imply that we have no walls separating our BUs from working together." He was not happy, but also had no lines of responsibility to me or my business segment.
And like all open offices it was loud so everyone put on headphones and we had zero cross-BU interaction and very low inter-BU interaction. At one point corporate tried to push a no headphones rule because it looked bad when they brought in customers and it did not land well in the cube dwellers. A compromise was reached to not allow headphones when customers leadership visits where planned, about once a month.
My biggest problem with the design was that they guy in the desk that faced me spent around 80% of his time on conference calls. Now he wasn't loud at all, almost never said anything on these calls, but he would sit silently with his headset on staring directly at me the whole time. Now he wasn't looking at me, just looking forward but it was really disconcerting.
What I always find funny about the whole concept is that the open cube was really first imagined by Taylor as he tried to apply physical labor efficiencies into the office world. You would have everyone in an open office with the manager slighly raised up behind everyone so he could monitor them to ensure everyone was working at peak efficiency. Plus the modern leader of open offices, a company I forgot the name of in Colorado implemented and pushed open offices into the modern world, and then killed the practice internally in less than 2 years.
1) in your math you are assuming he took no money off the table in the 4 years before this point; that is just plain not true, he go bonuses every other year before 2019
2) I believe that profits/growth on a whole ate a trailing indicator, so his actual impact will be seen over the next couple of years; and if you look at 2019 as the first time in 22 years that the company posted a loss...