The CEO of Zoom explictily stated that he felt in zoom meetings people were being too "friendly" and not willing to have "debate".
Why would it be bad for employees to be friendly? What employees want to have unfriendly debates in meetings? I think it's just managers that want that. What kind of "debate" do managers want? Why do they not want meetings to be "friendly"? Methinks they just want to yell at employees and don't feel comfortable doing it in zoom meetings for some reason...
Yeah but the First Order launched a fighter attack that took out most of the Resistance leadership, and after that success they decided to not do that anymore. They could've easily spotted any ships trying to escape if they had their fighters constantly harassing the Resistance ships.
So the idiot Resistance plan was to count on the First Order to be idiots. But while they were idiotic enough to not continue using their fighters (which were super effective), but not so idiotic as to not look out the window.
Have some sympathy for Holdo! When you're an idiot in an idiot plot, it's really hard to judge how idiotic your enemy will be.
Depending on the agreements they made, they might lose those tax breaks... and they do care about that.
Yeah I'm way more available when working from home, since I can get my nicotine fix at my desk and I can't do that in the office. I need to get up and walk around to get the blood flowing, in the office I think it would be weird to walk a few laps around the cubicle to do this, so I end up being further from my desk more. At home I'm basically always close enough to hear my computer make a ding when I get a message. And if there's an urgent issues that requires attention off hours... sorry not much I can do to help you when I'm on a bus transiting to and from work.
Yeah and for that minority, they could still go into the office 5 days a week.
My previous boss that found family members too distracting at home so he came in 5 days. But he was cool and told us "yeah don't worry about coming in the days HR is telling you to, I come in every day and hardly anybody is here any way. " Oddly enough, most of the time we actually did come in on the days HR said because we didn't want to get him into trouble for it.
It's almost like if the bosses aren't complete assholes, people will actually want to come into the office more.
“Have you tried disagreeing on a call! It’s hard!”
When it's an online meeting, they're worried about it potentially being recorded. So what they're really saying is that they can't verbally abuse employees without there potentially being evidence of it.
The deals they had with various governments to get tax breaks if they built the office in their city are still a consideration. Amazon put governments of municipalities into a bidding war so they could have highly paid software engineers working in their city. They probably aren't going to get those tax breaks any more if most of those offices are empty.
HR only cares because they're told to make a policy and it's their job to enforce it.
I don’t even get how any company with several sites has anything to stand on. Makes no fucking sense.
Companies like Amazon got major tax breaks and free land from governments to build these office sites. Governments gave these incentives with the expectation that it would generate economic activity around those sites. But if everyone is working from home those offices aren't delivering on the promised economic activity.
And also they spent a lot of money on those offices and so want them to be used. It's hard for whoever decided to build that office and the government officials that gave all the tax incentives towards it to admit that conditions have changes and all of that was for no significant benefit. It sucks to realize something you put in a lot of work into had no real benefit. Most people just have to accept that. But if you're in a position of power you can make people do things that will make your project look like it had a successful outcome.
Didn't Holdo's plan involve modifying some spaceships so they wouldn't be detected? Wouldn't that involve engineers? Isn't Rose and engineer? Why didn't Rose know what Holdo's plan was? Did Holdo also not tell the engineers her plan? Maybe that's why half the ships got blown up by the First Order immediately.
That whole plotline made no sense and was completely pointless. But basically all of the plotlines were pointless in that movies.
Or just have Rian Johnson do a "Star Wars Story" movie where he could come up with some characters and do his own thing. Seems to be what he wanted to do.
JJ Abrams was the best guy to do a movie where they're bringing back the original characters again. As soon as you bring back some old characters it's never going to be completely fresh and original because you have those existing characters there. But that's fine, they didn't need to be great ground breaking movies. Having three solid movies with the original cast passing the torch to a new generation with a bunch of fun action scenes is all it needed to be.
I think they did things exactly backwards. The Episodes should've played it a little more safe (you got the beloved original characters so you don't want to screw it up) while the "Star Wars Story" movies should've taken big risks. Instead they made TLJ be a weird departure from action adventure (which didn't accomplish anything) while the Star Wars Story movies were a couple of prequels that couldn't deviate much from things we already knew. Should've taken some risks on the Star Wars story movies because missing the mark on those ones wouldn't have hurt the franchise. I didn't care for Rogue One, but it didn't ruin anything because I can just ignore it. Can't ignore TLJ with it being right in the middle of a Trilogy featuring characters I like.
People get convicted of fraud charges all the time. Archegos being probably the biggest non-Trump non-Crypto related cases of late.
It's just that if it's a fraud conviction that's not related to either Trump or crypto (and maybe soon Trump will be convicted of crypto related fraud!) it's not big news.
Now you're talking about CEOs as a nebulous they.
I'm talking about a CEO that said things similar to what an amazon exec said under an article about what that amazon exec said.
Also I work in software development. There has been a clear uptick in negativity towards developers where I work, which happens to be in a similar field to the one in the article.
I've also worked with AWS, and I can tell you for sure, they can't afford to lose their best talent. Their system is pretty janky in many places and their boss should be putting more effort in making better software instead of playing games about forcing people to sit in a specific chair 5 days per week.