50
submitted 1 day ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
10
submitted 1 day ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
[-] [email protected] 12 points 1 day ago

if it can happen in the South, it can happen in your workplace too! you should start a union--and if you need help to that end, reach out to the AFL-CIO or, if you would prefer a more radical alternative, EWOC

47
submitted 1 day ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
[-] [email protected] 14 points 2 days ago

this is actually quite cute, i think.

50
submitted 2 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
22
submitted 3 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
13
Embrace the weird (a.wholelottanothing.org)
submitted 3 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

The other day I was complaining to a friend how I've been spinning my wheels lately, having trouble finding any projects or gigs I could work on.

He came back with a quick, short, smart response:

Who cares? Just make weird shit.

28
submitted 5 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
78
submitted 5 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

KPMG surveyed U.S. CEOs of companies turning over at least $500 million and found that just one-third expect a full return to the office in the next three years.

So it's official: Leaders who believe that office workers will be back at their desks five days a week in the near future are now in the small minority.

It's a complete 360 on their stance last year, when 62% of CEOs surveyed predicted that working from home would end by 2026.

At the time, 90% of CEOs even admitted that they were so steadfast on summoning staff back to their vertical towers that they were sweetening the pot with salary raises, promotions, and favorable assignments to those who showed face more.

But now, bosses are backtracking: Nearly half of CEOs have concluded that the future of work is hybrid—up from 34% last year.

44
submitted 5 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

it's a bit of a busy week but i am currently reading I Want to Believe: Posadism, UFOs and Apocalypse Communism

53
submitted 6 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

these of course come with their own tradeoffs, but you take what you can get

19
submitted 6 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

[...]Seabound found BLOQS, a 32,000-square-foot converted warehouse in the north London suburb of Enfield, fully kitted out with £1.3 million (around $1.7 million) worth of light industrial equipment for all kinds of manufacturing, including wood processing and metal fabrication, laser cutting and engraving, 3D printing, sewing machines, spray painting and more. If that didn’t already make the case for moving in, the flexible membership structure then quickly sealed the deal for Fredriksson and Wen.

The initial sign-up is free, with members simply paying a daily rate for the machinery they need to use, as well as for flexible office and storage space if they need it. Raw materials are available to purchase too, price-matched with local suppliers. And if members need to learn to use a particular piece of equipment, they can pay for training. An added bonus is the on-site restaurant, where an award-winning chef serves a seasonable and affordable Mediterranean menu. Yet the biggest draw for the Seabound team was the community of 1,000 other like-minded members.

16
submitted 6 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
[-] [email protected] 21 points 1 month ago

our previous fiscal host is dissolving at the end of the year--most of the details are over in our previous announcement post; all contributions go toward keeping the website up and paying for any labor associated with it outside of admin work

[-] [email protected] 48 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

in my mind voting in our current system is just pretty straightforward utilitarian calculus (and can't be anything else): you should vote for the option which will do the least harm and has the highest probability of winning. even if you, say, accept that Biden and Trump are equal on I/P, that just means you should look to other issues on which they are distinct--and they are distinct on basically every other issue in a way that clearly suggests Biden to be the best choice you can make here.

take just the Autocracy Tracker, which makes it unambiguous that Trump, if he wins, is planning a sweeping authoritarian wave of deportations, purges, restrictions of civil rights, and repression of minority groups and ideological groups he disagrees with. much of this is, in a sense, already happening here and already a form of genocide against some groups (trans people most prominently--it is now de facto illegal to be trans and legal to bring harm to trans people in large portions of the US). a Trump win will probably ensure there is no safe place for such groups in this country anymore.

on a moral level: i am just not sympathetic to the idea that voting for Biden constitutes blood on your hands in a meaningful way. i think if you accept this line of argumentation, you would ultimately have to bite the bullet that this could also be said of paying taxes[^1]--and i certainly don't begrudge people for paying their taxes even as this lines the pocket of the war machine, so then why should judge them for voting? in general: by virtue of existing within a state, you will always be complicit to some degree in the crimes of that state, regardless of what you do to extricate yourself from supporting them. so i just don't think that abstention from voting or voting for a more morally defensible alternative actually cleans your hands of the blood being perceived here.

separately, and more pragmatically: there is no compelling third party with anywhere near a possibility of winning or even scoring a "symbolic victory." a vote for a leftist third party right now is, in a real sense, a vote wasted--because these parties are incompetent, fractured, and full of people who are not serious candidates. even with the Green Party (by far the most electorally advanced of them) nobody has ever trembled at their influence and in practice they mostly seem to exist to waste a lot of the money given to them on quixotic presidential candidates. imo: any actual movement challenging the power--your DSAs, for example--is going to be built from the ground up and not imposed through the presidency, and is only going to use electoralism as one of its several political arms.

[^1]: arguably, it's even more true of paying taxes than of voting: votes may make no difference in whether something happens or not, but taxes actively make them possible

[-] [email protected] 25 points 1 month ago

yeah, we're vaguely aware of some of these. hopefully, when we reach out to OCF they'll be able to hand us off to one of them or something like that--but obviously, it's a good idea to have a backup plan, and you don't just want to have the single basket of eggs after the rug gets pulled out from under you like this

[-] [email protected] 41 points 1 month ago

I think this could be good.

on principle i will never trust any corporation to do good things unless compelled to by a higher power such as the state, and i certainly do not trust them to do good things when the corporate-speak being used to describe those things is "enhanced features like dynamic pricing and daypart offerings along with AI-enabled menu changes and suggestive selling." reeks of grift

[-] [email protected] 56 points 1 month ago

i literally cannot think of a pricing model i want less for a restaurant i might conceivably patronize than this

[-] [email protected] 20 points 2 months ago

this is definitely undesirable in a number of contexts, but as far as we're aware this is a Lemmy thing we can't change and don't really have control over.

[-] [email protected] 22 points 2 months ago

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has ruled that weakening end-to-end encryption disproportionately risks undermining human rights. The international court's decision could potentially disrupt the European Commission's proposed plans to require email and messaging service providers to create backdoors that would allow law enforcement to easily decrypt users' messages.

[-] [email protected] 32 points 2 months ago

i think it's been gliding on the entropy of its original value for a long time at this point (it was founded in 2009)—certainly i can't remember a time where it was useful, but then i only first encountered it in like 2016.

[-] [email protected] 42 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Google "Search Liaison" Danny Sullivan confirmed the feature removal in an X post, saying the feature "was meant for helping people access pages when way back, you often couldn't depend on a page loading. These days, things have greatly improved. So, it was decided to retire it."

okay but... has it? this seems like an unfounded premise, intuitively speaking

view more: next ›

alyaza

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF