Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

173

I would say that this is true for most professions.

Archive: https://archive.today/Gzo48

From the post:

>Our work culture changed mainly for the better after COVID-19, but there were also some negative changes - like an increase of 13.5% in the amount of meetings per employee.[1] The problem is that there's a huge gap between how managers think about meetings versus how engineers think about them. In the famous “Maker’s Schedule, Manager’s Schedule” [2], Paul Graham wrote: “When you're operating on the maker's schedule, meetings are a disaster. A single meeting can blow a whole afternoon, by breaking it into two pieces each too small to do anything hard in.” This problem hasn't gone away with AI coding tools - it's getting worse, as managers assume engineers can now be productive in smaller time chunks.

I would say that this is true for most professions. Archive: https://archive.today/Gzo48 From the post: >>Our work culture changed mainly for the better after COVID-19, but there were also some negative changes - like an increase of 13.5% in the amount of meetings per employee.[1] The problem is that there's a huge gap between how managers think about meetings versus how engineers think about them. In the famous “Maker’s Schedule, Manager’s Schedule” [2], Paul Graham wrote: “When you're operating on the maker's schedule, meetings are a disaster. A single meeting can blow a whole afternoon, by breaking it into two pieces each too small to do anything hard in.” This problem hasn't gone away with AI coding tools - it's getting worse, as managers assume engineers can now be productive in smaller time chunks.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (14).
[–] • 1 pt

I had considered reporting them, but that email was most likely all names just put into the bcc field. When a government body is called in, I want to make sure something happens as a result of it. By sending that email to everyone, they can say that they didn't target anyone, and maintained anonymity because nobody could see who else received the email. I'm not a lawyer, but I can already see their defense if this was brought up, it is not strong enough to stand alone, so it is best used in conjunction with a bunch of other pieces of evidence to make a case. I need to establish a long enough timeline of their repeated attempts at shit like this to have a case a lawyer would be happy to take on against their legal department.