That's called being a centrist or an independent. Lemmy hates those.
Well, this was a massive failure that we won't be repeating.
I do. It's not enough.
No-discussion downvoters are a massive problem here moreso than any other site I've ever used.
Please also disallow ~~Congress from trading in~~ the ~~US~~ stock market ~~with their inside information~~.
One small adjustment and it's perfect!
Oh man... you're basically speaking directly to why I made our small community (consider this a personal invite). As I said elsewhere, I find Lemmy actively hostile.
The number of indignant replies and comment-free downvotes we get inundated with continually is… disheartening.
People want content, but actively detract from any content that doesn’t explicitly cater to them. It’s hard to take.
Interesting to see a non-positive take! I always appreciate your write-ups.
I too wish there was more unification with certain elements. I can only imagine what they could do if they combined development resources into a few channels instead of being scattered to the winds. Maybe add an overall design aesthetic (while maintaining the means to change it) instead of just "it works I suppose."
I ran Mandrake Linux in roughly 2003 or so, but went back to Windows because games didn't work.
Ever since Windows 11 has come around I thought it was a good idea to possibly attempt to move to Linux again. I'm strongly leaning towards Mint because it's fairly Linux beginner friendly from what I hear.
I run an IT firm and we have recently been putting together an open-source stack.
The problem is that we use a lot of Microsoft software on the back end and some of that can't be replaced.
The other issue is that while gaming has come a long way, a good chunk of my 5,000 games still don't run on Linux. Newer ones tend to be glitchy for a great deal of time before they function perfectly. Also I happen to currently have an Nvidia card which I have heard is a problem.
If anyone has any recommendations, I would love to hear them! From servers, to productivity, to gaming I am open to whatever you guys would recommend.
Nope. Originally her party was elected when somebody else was at the helm, and then when Jason Kenney retired, she was just kind of put there.
Literally no one in the public voted for her originally.
I'm in Alberta but I vote NDP.
Before he left, Kenney was actually warning that the crazies were trying to take over. Hell, we thought Kenney was crazy. Turns out he was right about this one thing.
Literally nobody in the public voted for her in the first term at least.
Edit: WTF, Lemmy. I'm factually correct. Look at her Wikipedia page if you don't believe me.
She was appointed when Jason Kenney resigned. She won in the second term, not the first term. In the first term, the public was not given a chance to vote for her or not.
I can scale without issue most times and have done so multiple times during acquisitions.
Once we hit a certain number of people, I'd make the Matrix org system a little more fleshed-out. Right now our projects are from 1-10 people, but it wouldn't be hard to add an org-wide Scheduler role that can wrangle interested groups for projects. It's all about putting a plan into place before you make a decision, not deciding and then trying to FORCE things to fit. With Microsoft, I imagine they'd have to implement larger teams of relevant staff on each project and divide them into overall pods with the Scheduler able to change who is needed in each pod. It's doable, but without having been anywhere near that large, I'd have to see what was implemented along the way.
Also of interest, we don't have an issue with The Peter Principle as you're never forced to move out of a position of competence or interest. You're not salary limited simply because you don't want to be a manager; in fact, there are no managers.
Which I understand. It's why I called the company a "firm" as I feel it's a more accurate descriptor. The main difference is that we don't let employees just starting their trial period vote or lead a team yet until they get a feel for how we operate. We're quite a large swing from what normal companies do and it takes time to adjust and understand, not to mention that our processes are a complete rethink of how it is anywhere else.
The shares can be sold to other shareholders, but not to anyone outside the company. Unlike most corporations, we don't want solely financially invested shareholders as they're in business to extract value. They are parasites.
I've built this model out in hopes it will catch on. I feel that if most companies operated under Social Capitalism that we'd be substantially better off. Certain aspects of it are so important and such a step up from the norm that I don't understand how they weren't obvious to other owners. But... greed I guess. Greed hurts every system it's in.
Nick is a goddamn treasure and I will fight anyone who thinks different.