Companies that have draconian RTO in place will a) pay more and b) get less in terms of skills/experience/etc when hiring.

A ton of tech roles are hyper-global. I once had direct reports in 2 countries, 3 time zones, and in 5 cities (all at once). In 10 years with my current employer I've had 7 bosses in 5 time zones. Why you might ask? Largely technical skillsets.

Location + skills + experience ... pick 2.

Road transport is roughly 12% of global emissions, and that includes busses/trucks/etc (which will be harder to electrify). Even if we are charitable, electric cars reduce emissions by at most 2/3 since they have a much higher footprint whilst being built. Our efforts would be much better spent in reducing emissions in other areas, if only there were some. The problem is there is no good place to start, emissions sources are too fragmented (see linked pie chart).

https://ourworldindata.org/ghg...

If we are going to meaningfully reduce emissions or their effects ... it will be with Geo-engineering, adaptation techniques, or moonshot energy sources (hydrogen, etc). Forcing folks into electric cars won't do much.

You do realize that 14% off the problem comes from passenger cars, don't you?

Just like the old engineering axiom, time-money-quality pick two there is new hiring variant.

You can have any combination of location, salary, and skills ... so long as you only get two of them. If you want someone local, expect to pay more for less. Much more for much less if you want them in an office. I might be an anomaly, but I've been at a high end tech firm for 8.5 years. I've reported to folks in a Fort Lauderdale, Tel Aviv, Cambridge (MA), Santa Clara, and now "somewhere in Texas". Not once have I had a boss in the same area code (Chicago). Heck, I went 5 years at my previous job w/o a local boss as well.

Pre-COVID this involved some travel, generally a few days a month. But since everyone nixed travel budgets getting them funded again (for anything not sales related) has been frowned upon by owners and investors of all stripes.

There are jobs where people make actual things, learn from osmosis, etc. where in person time is valuable. Much more common are managers and firms who can't handle themselves remotely. Bet against them.

So I'm a parent of a 9yo who is on OIT (oral immunotherapy) for peanuts, hazelnuts, cashews and pistachios.

By chance, we happen live nearby one of the two doctors in our state doing OIT. Still there was a several year wait, unless you were willing to pay cash ($10k) to line jump. It is not unusual for parents to take their kids out of state (monthly) for access. The success rate is really good, like over 75%. We've been fortunate to have had great results, and the therapy has been life changing for our family.

That said, man do I wish they had pills. Every day we give her the equivalent of 8.0 grams peanuts, 7.2 grams of cashews (or 3.2 grams of pistachios alternating), and 7.2 grams of hazelnuts. She hates them of course, and there is not enough chocolate pudding around to make them palatable. Fortunately she really likes TV and is easily distracted.

Pills would be loads easier, if affective.

Still I am not complaining, it beats epi-pen stabbing and frantic ER drives when she inadvertently comes into contact with one of her allergens. It means not white knuckling flights, being afraid to eat at restaurants, or worried to put her on the school bus.

Seems to we working for China, eh? https://ourworldindata.org/gra...

"Meta employed 87,300 at the end of September, which represented a 28% jump over the year prior." - https://www.yahoo.com/now/face... I was also surprised this got called out ... the recruitment team will be "disproportionately affected"

I worked at a large online university for a few back.

Somewhere along the way I got keys to an AWS account and few interesting diverse data sets (attendance, grades, interactivity, etc). I was just having fun learning ElasticMapReduce until I stumbled upon some very interesting results. We had awesome attendance data, since all the classes were online. If you graphed attendance by number of class logins per week (or to a lesser degree minutes spent in class, lectures attended, etc.) you'd notice it dropped over the course of the term for all final letter grades as well as drop's and incomplete's. This makes sense, particularly for the demographic (lower end of higher ed, received credits from a few other schools). We considered ourselves the school of last resort, for student's who'd bounced around other institutions without earning a degree.

What was startling was that the downward slope of the drop in attendance over the course of a term was directly proportional to the outcome (grade), with one fun exception (D's where there was a dead cat bounce as the end of the terms).

It got to the point I could tell whether someone was going to pass a class on the number of days attended in the first week of class. This pattern held across all courses, but was especially pronounced in intro level ones. We turned this into a gamification effort and had some pretty nice results, but the academics weren't as interested as one would have thought (perhaps because I am not one?).

Someone above mentioned government mandates, and I'd wager I wasn't the first to notice this (either with data or via experience). While the slashdot crowd might have done fine skipping class, most simply aren't. If Uncle Sam is footing most of the educational bill, shouldn't we as taxpayers demand steps are taken to ensure methods to maximize the return on investment (courses passed, degrees earned, etc)?

I'd also like to reiterate that we, slashdotters, are not the norm. Sure I skipped class senior year to code Netscape's LiveWire at work, but that if far from the norm.

Some interesting data here: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/c...

I bought one of those battery replacement kits an iPhone or two back, and had a hell of a time getting the battery out. I ended up with a number of cuts on my fingers and somehow even got a good shock even though I'd disconnected it. D'oh!

IT Staff != Software Developers

Bullshit, the trains are fine ... even the 2am "vomit commit".

I see less and less H1B and offshoring over time. It goes like this. Unless you know EXACTLY what you want, getting output out of offshore techies or their onshore equivalents is a giant PITA. Totally not worth it. It is a really hard way to save money. I've seen many companies give up after a few failed attempts.

Funny, I see all sorts of high paying jobs where H1Bs and offshoring are NEVER an option. To make either one work, you need well thought out and detailed requirements and time. You also need some cultural understanding to work within a "team". I see less and less of both as time goes on.

Before you get too involved in the algorithm's performance, it helps to get a handle on the numbers. This look at the numbers is equal parts morbid, funny and sad. http://heyjackass.com/

I really think this is crap, I once quit the same job three times over a two year period. No one ever tried to "shaft" me.

The first time it was to work at a rival startup during a takeover, my employer matched the cash/options/perks and whatnot. In addition, I was not forced to sign a bullshit non compete agreement, which is why I started looking in the first place.

The second time I was fed up with the type of projects I was getting, and planning on working at a friends' startup. My employer relocated to London with a free flat (4 years later still double my mortgage), cost of living bonus, and budget to fly back when I needed.

I quit for good when I got back from London, about a year later.

Never say never. The key is honesty, there is nothing wrong with seeing what is out there and might make youy happier.