My ex-wife had a temporary ostomy and she went to the office after she recovered from the operation. Shit, she was restricted from driving for six months due to having had a seizure and I had to drive her to work every day, while working myself and carting around our daughter. Wasn't fun, but we made it work. Americans have gotten way too soft... assuming so much is impossible when our ancestors faced far worse and would give their left nut to have it so easy.

Workplace accommodations means providing that private bathroom or screen reading setups for the visually impaired.

Back in the 90s I worked at a JC Penney catalog call center. There was a woman who was in a motorized wheelchair who was blind. They equipped her with a screen reader and she was a great employee. I think if this lady could manage to get to work then most folks whining can probably do so as well. I like working from home as much as the next guy, but this isn't the correct way to do it.

He's not wrong... no one is forced to work there. As long as the job market is tight the employees have less bargaining power and won't be able to make such demands. But the company should also realize that many folks will give less than 100% and do just enough to fly under the radar if they feel the company isn't listening.

The building cost is just a perception thing. It's not as if they're paying for home offices plus the building, they're paying for just the building regardless. If it gets used or not doesn't actually affect the bottom line. If anything with less people there's less demand for HVAC and slightly less staff required as you can clean the bathrooms and empty trashcans on a less frequent basis. You've also got cafetarias, less wear and tear on furniture, etc.

Even Ruth Bader-Ginsberg admitted that RvW was an incorrect decision.

You obviously don't understand the Constitution. It's an issue for the states. The scope of the federal government was intended to be miniscule not all encompassing. There's a reason state constitutions exist... there would be no need if the US Constitution was intended to control every aspect of our lives.

Just yesterday I was in the office and in the middle of writing some new functions for automations I'm working on and had to stop in the middle of a flow state because I had to leave before traffic got really bad. It took me a long time to get back into the flow when I resumed work. Yet on days when I'm working from home I don't have such interruptions.

I know for some people working from home doesn't yield productivity. But for some of us it really does. My kid is grown and out of the house, my wife works from home on occasion and we know how to leave one another alone to work, and we each have dedicated work spaces with multiple monitors and comfortable chairs. Spending 90 minutes a day fighting traffic really doesn't add to my productivity.

I don't really remember using much on the web in 1994, I recall Gopher having more information I was looking for at that time. It wasn't really until 1995 that I remember all of the Geocities websites that popped up with awful backgrounds and animations.

When you hire contractors to build a fence or repair a leaking pipe do you research how much it costs for their daily living expenses? Surely you want to ensure that you are paying them a living wage, right? I doubt you would get multiple bids and pick the best value regardless of each individual's living expenses.

No one said their only source of news was Truth Social. One juror said they try to read as many sources as possible, and has seen some of Trump's tweets FROM Truth Social which were retweeted on Twitter/X.

You can even do something unthinkable today and let your kid play with other kids their age unsupervised like we did when we were kids. They could learn how to deal with conflict among themselves and later grow up to be resilient adults who don't need to be coddled.

If you think me coming into your home and stealing your stuff is theft then we're done having a discussion.... living next to me means allowing me to come in and confiscate your property. You've got such a strong argument that you refuse to engage in debate... it's definitely not Stockholm Syndrome.

Will these AI models be adept at identifying Schiff's partisan hackery like his insistence that Trump colluded with Russia? This buffoon should have resigned in disgrace years ago.

You're absolutely right that consumers claim to want to buy one product yet tend to purchase another, but attributing it to short sightedness is a stretch. The issue is that people are asked such survey questions when there's no actual cost attached to their decisions. Would you rather drive a BMW or a Tata Motors vehicle? Wouldn't it depend on who is paying for the vehicle?

I don't like to presume what other people value versus me... it's a bit elitist to make such assumptions. Simply because I value a quality set of Wiha screwdrivers doesn't mean that the guy starting a small engine repair business is being short sighted when he purchases a set from Harbor Freight. Would he be better off not starting the business because he can't afford tools that are more likely to last 20 years versus 5 years? It's possible he'd also rather make a tiny investment today to discover which of the tools he needs the most and make a better informed decision about when he can afford to invest in better tools. He also might want to invest more in marketing his business than spending his budget on tools. In any case he is the one in the best position to determine how he best spends his money, not others in ivory towers making proclamations about him being short sighted.

I may bail if they tighten things down. I mod a few subreddits and it's with a very light touch. It's up to the users to upvote and downvote what they think is on-topic and off-topic. I'll remove stuff that's obvious spam that's completely irrelevant to the sub, but anything ambiguous is left to the users. I adhere to the Reddit policies and will remove illegal content, doxxing, etc... but I never liked a strict moderation style.