|
Hillary won those debates like the Falcons won the super bowl.
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 17:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 05:40 |
|
|
Woofer posted:Hillary won those debates like the Falcons won the super bowl. I mean, she did, it just didn't matter since everyone's opinion of Trump and Hillary was already baked in, and the gains she made after the debates were mostly erased by election day (In part due to ~emails~).
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 17:46
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:I mean, she did, it just didn't matter since everyone's opinion of Trump and Hillary was already baked in, and the gains she made after the debates were mostly erased by election day (In part due to ~emails~). If that’s a win then I have no idea why debates exist.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 17:48
|
|
|
Debates exist to comfort the liberal fantasy that people's minds can be changed if you just present your argument eloquently enough, despite scientific evidence that it just causes people to dig in to their held beliefs even more.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 17:55
|
|
|
Hillary is the 2016 Debate and Popular Vote Champion. Poor Trump!
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 17:56
|
|
|
Tv advertising revenue of course. My guess is Biden at some point challenges Trump’s manhood and starts doing push-ups while Trump does his over exaggerated facial and hand gestures, then Fox News spins it as manly to take the high ground.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 17:56
|
|
|
Internet Wizard posted:Perhaps the second or third google results then That was disingenuous of me, I was trying to type up a response before I had an appointment and didn't give it the nuance it deserved. I didn't mean to play a game of find-a-more-convincing-article-nope-not-good-enough. I know it's not known at a rigorous level because it's very difficult to know at a rigorous level. You can't design an experiment to determine meaningful broad conclusion because the question is too generic to clearly demonstrate an all-cases fundamental truth. You need bodies of literature which will likely determine a complicated answer. The way to analyze these kinds of effects will be to consider a variety of inputs and determine based on either experiment or analogous data how each of those effects appear to have influenced outcomes. I believe there is evidence that supports that working from home increases productivity in many cases--I believe most for office-type work. But I'm confident that the proportions of the benefits change from case to case. So, lets break down that Stanford article to show what I mean: quote:That research was based on a randomized control trial on 1,000 employees of Ctrip, a Chinese travel company. quote:The experiment revealed that working from home during a nine-month period led to a 13 percent increase in performance – almost an extra day of output per week – plus a 50 percent drop in employee-quit rates. quote:The Ctrip experiment also explicitly asked employees to work from home four days a week and come into the office every fifth day. quote:The element of personal choice is a final factor contributing to the success of Ctrip’s work-from-home policy that is absent in the current situation. Of the 1,000 Ctrip employees offered the choice to work from home, only 500 volunteered. The others wanted to remain in the office. quote:After nine months of allowing those employees to do their jobs at home, Ctrip asked the original volunteers whether they wanted to keep working remotely or return to the office. Half of them requested to return to the office, despite their average commute being 40 minutes each way. And long term qualitative review of the study suggests that this implementation of remote work is problematic. A model to determine what kinds of jobs improve would be huge, require invasive and massive survey and experimentation, would need to be performed outside of the current context, and would also be limited in descriptive power to the technological and social contexts it was measured in--the experiment would need to be repeated to adjust for changes in: -social perception (i.e. workers may be more receptive now than they were last year), -legal requirements and ramifications (10 years ago, there was zero liability for data compromise, now there is some, though little, 10 years from now there may be more), -technology (will advances in VR and our willingness/ability to engage in online leisure more generally allow us to reap the benefits that Bloom ascribes to face-to-face meetings?) -other factors That's how I can feel confident that a study without sufficient resolution and predictive power doesn't exist. But you don't need one. We don't learn to ride a bike by learning how all bikes work, how all physics work, and how we can manipulate those properties by contorting our bodies in real time. We learn to ride a bike by starting to ride a bike and detecting deviation and making small adjustments. When you limit your question from "Is remote work good?" to "Is a particular implementation of remote work effective for this particular firm" you can make changes, perform local experiments, and determine how those affect local metrics. I believe that if we completely abolish local work tomorrow forever, there's a lot of risk associated with that decision. I think not recognizing that remote work has benefits would be a mistake as well. And if some people prefer to work remotely, sufficiently such that they're willing to take pay cuts to remotely work full-time, then that's a good indication that if you do not implement a policy and a framework to support those people that do, you're leaving valuable talent on the table. Personally, I advocate for more remote work and more remote work options. The reason has less to do with productivity and cost benefit, but with a desire to be more free, with people more in charge of their own happiness. If this becomes true, it wont be because it's more effective. It'll be because it's at least acceptably less effective, but the worker prefers it. But we also have to solve a lot of other issues before that would be true in all cases. Enough of all that. I think what this is, more than anything, is Zuck opening his mouth and mangling HR imperatives through the eyes of a soulless robot. What he said is, (paraphrased in an ominous voice)You don't have to come back to work, but we're paying you less if you move and if you lie there will be consequences. The same policy could have been described as, For employees local to the bay area, we're considering a remote-work intensive employment option, allowing employees to work from home 90% of the time if they wish. Because the infrastructure that supports this could support work elsewhere, and Facebook (TM) is an employee-oriented company that wants to support the desires of our talent, and even though we don't yet fully know the costs and benefits of working remotely, when we get back to work we're considering employment outside our concentration areas as well! Our implementation plan is tentative and likely to change as we learn more, but because this is a person-oriented business and I'm a person with blood and emotion and all of those things you real humans have, we'll be offering generous renegotiation for employees who prefer to utilize this remote work infrastructure and operate from outside our primary employment area. But Zuck isn't programmed to do that, so here we are. piL fucked around with this message at 18:09 on May 22, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 18:01
|
|
|
CBJSprague24 posted:Biden is going to shoot himself in the dick and hand Trump four more years on a silver platter, isn't he? Already made my peace with the fact that Trump's walking away with another term. I'm just here to see how badly Biden manages to gently caress up and embarrass himself in the coming months. 
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 18:03
|
|
|
90s Solo Cup posted:Already made my peace with the fact that Trump's walking away with another term. I'm just here to see how badly Biden manages to gently caress up and embarrass himself in the coming months. Hopefully he takes the entire party down with him.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 18:03
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7pz7CqWTMs
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 18:12
|
|
|
Woofer posted:Hopefully he takes the entire party down with him. hope is a mistake
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 18:12
|
|
|
Y’all missing the entire point of this whole mess https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/aliens-ufo-bristol-lockdown-coronavirus-4156457
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 18:13
|
|
|
Holy gently caress 2020 finally delivers good news
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 18:19
|
|
|
shame on an IGA posted:Holy gently caress 2020 finally delivers good news Hot drat! I thought it got cancelled because the animators tried to unionize?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 18:26
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:I mean, she did, it just didn't matter since everyone's opinion of Trump and Hillary was already baked in, and the gains she made after the debates were mostly erased by election day (In part due to ~emails~). I watched those debates and she didn't win.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 18:33
|
|
|
90s Solo Cup posted:Already made my peace with the fact that Trump's walking away with another term. I'm just here to see how badly Biden manages to gently caress up and embarrass himself in the coming months. On the brightside we won't have to worry about presidential elections ever again.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 18:40
|
|
|
facialimpediment posted:Fuckin RIP Meanwhile in India: https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1263854238196568065
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 18:44
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/markknoller/status/1263890820291231744?s=19 This is classic Trump. He wants to be running a unitary government but doesn't want any of the risk or downside and then blames governors
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 19:10
|
|
|
Nick Soapdish posted:https://twitter.com/markknoller/status/1263890820291231744?s=19 Fine, loving whatever. One problem solving another problem by creating a third problem.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 19:17
|
|
|
PeterCat posted:I watched those debates and she didn't win. maybe its a berenstain berenstein thing
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 20:13
|
|
|
BigDave posted:Hot drat! It front and centers adult swim so they probably found a new backer.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 20:17
|
|
|
I don't know what it is, but every time I see Betsy DeVos pop up in my news feed, I feel like I'm going to see Christine Baranski play her in a CBS movie about a scandal in like, a decade.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 20:27
|
|
|
tuca is my fave disaster
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 20:29
|
|
|
ngl id take 85k in the suburbs of Dallas vs 100k in the Bay Area
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 20:34
|
|
|
Biden campaign considering "Real n**** roll call" by Lil'jon & The Eastside Boyz ft. Ice Cube as their campaign anthem
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 20:39
|
|
|
^I don't even know if that's a loving joke or not. (they should use Nobody Speak)Best Friends posted:I think Biden is the only dem Trump would be willing to debate, after how Hillary of all people wrecked him. Dems will not pull out of a debate because following the norms when engaging republicans is their core value. I think they're going to happen. Trump doesn't think Hillary wrecked him, and neither does 1/3 of the country. He's going to win the debate(s) against Biden, because all he has to do is show up and repeat catchphrases. He will absolutely say "lock him up" referencing Hunter. Godholio fucked around with this message at 20:53 on May 22, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 20:49
|
|
|
Is FTGE still ok, despite potential to be construed as homophobic? Because my brain has reached the limit of stupid it can take and would be ok with an asteroid strike.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 20:52
|
|
|
thanks for clearing up Hilary won those debates, guys, wow counted for so much.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 21:08
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Yamiche/status/1263921919738490880 Everyone will forget about this by Tuesday, it will come back in ads around October/November as the new "you didn't build that", and some Trumper will whine on TV about how white people can't say the n-word. The election was likely already over months ago because Donnie can't shut his trap and can't help but try to be the lead story every day. His campaign keeps putting out distorted/edited clips so this genuine fuckup won't break through. This will likely happen many more times and it still won't matter. Biden will win by 8%, 304-234. It's not 2016. BTW: The Republican candidate for Senate in Oregon is having a normal one: https://twitter.com/ByMikeBaker/status/1263927846109540352
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 21:22
|
|
|
Godholio posted:(they should use Nobody Speak) And turn it up right at that *one* part...
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 21:23
|
|
|
Godholio posted:^I don't even know if that's a loving joke or not. (they should use Nobody Speak) Mind Playing Tricks
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 21:24
|
|
|
shame on an IGA posted:Mind Playing Tricks I was just jamming to this Geto Boys classic
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 21:26
|
|
|
Knives Amilli posted:ngl id take 85k in the suburbs of Dallas vs 100k in the Bay Area 100k in the Bay Area means you're probably not working at FB lol
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 21:44
|
|
|
shame on an IGA posted:Mind Playing Tricks Praying
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 22:00
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/st...mber%3D777pti34
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2020 01:59
|
|
|
Welcome to the resistance, Kayleigh
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2020 02:00
|
|
|
Brian Beutler (@brianbeutler) Tweeted: Fixed it for you, @nytimes. https://t.co/TH5dOnaRQ5 https://twitter.com/brianbeutler/status/1263992019124391938?s=20 NYT: Flouting norms, Trump has four Supreme Court justices arrested.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2020 02:12
|
|
|
supposedly at some point recently the Trump Admin was discussing resumption of nuke testing
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2020 02:12
|
|
|
Woofer posted:If that’s a win then I have no idea why debates exist. Ostensibly, debates exist to give candidates a chance to speak directly to undecided voters and for each candidate to clearly enunciate their stances on a number of issues while challenging their opponents. In the modern campaign reality, of course, the questions are chosen to generate soundbites, there's not enough time for answers to reach anything of substance, and candidates are carefully coached to avoid straying from any of their pre-established answers and talking points, so they're effectively campaign commercials for undecided or persuadable voters who are only casually aware of the candidates and their proposals (which consists of more people than you'd think, most people aren't mainlining the news or twitter). (modern debates are extremely bad regardless, of course) As to why the 2016 debates failed to change the result of the election despite Clinton 'winning' all three (Going by polling at least), a lot of it comes down to the fundamentals of why she lost 2016 to begin with, but also because the last debate took place nearly a month before the election, which gave Trump time to recover enough to the point that, when Clinton got hit with the Comey letter at the last minute, he was able to pull ahead by slim margins in just enough states to win.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2020 02:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 05:40 |
|
|
Microsoft's CEO of all people made a decent observation about the current corporate work from home situation. It's one thing to go home suddenly for an emergency and continue to be productive with same team that has been building relationships in the office. But that may not extend indefinitely, especially once there's natural turnover on the team. Eventually the people you need something from aren't the same group you get lunch with every day and go out for a happy hour with now and then. Does that mean employees are less invested in the outcome of their teammates' work? Does it mean what was previously done informally now has to be an official process? There's only limited data on this as you point out. I don't doubt that remote work is at least as productive in most circumstances for interchangeable workers whose output you can specifically measure - call center agents, QA testers, etc. But it's a much less obvious question for highly technical teams that rely on a variety of related skillsets.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2020 02:34
|
|
