monkeytennis

Employers will quickly learn that leashing a person to their laptop will not prevent wasted time, it'll cause them to waste time in other ways, and will drive away talent. The only harm is when it impacts outcomes, which is easier and more beneficial to track.

It's pretty obvious when someone is underperforming, you don't need to know whether they've been doing the laundry between meetings.

I wanted to pay it down while the rates were low, 10% would've started off ok, but obviously the lower it got, the less that was. Makes sense from the bank's pov, seems a fair trade-off for a fix.

It just feels like a huge gamble. I went the tracker route between 2012 and 2018 only because I didn't want the overpayment restrictions imposed by fixed deals.

Luckily it worked out, had I gone for a fixed rate I'd still be slowly paying it off, at a higher rate.

For every person who did well, there's someone else who didn't, mostly through unlucky timing.

It's crazy in the UK too, where 3-5 year fixes are common. I've know folk who at renewal next year will be paying £500-£800 extra, each month.

My biggest impact has been gas and elec, which maybe added that amount to my annual bill. I can't imagine the stress.

Wtf .. 16gb .. please prioritise that feature.

I agree on performance, but I'm well paid and would tolerate almost zero unjustified inconvenience. I can afford to take a cut, but in reality would probably earn even more elsewhere.

More experienced folk are also more likely to go freelance, since they have the skills, experience and contacts. Perm roles only make sense when they bring stability and benefits. I expect to see this a lot more, if RTO continues.

I also find the "just look how bad the hands are heh heh heh" thing so dumb .. it's going to learn how to draw hands pretty quickly

This is not news. Stop upvoting Twitter spam, it's not even vaguely interesting.

And within 12 hours, have forgotten 90%

Blaming young adults and families is unfair. Many institutions need to be held to account for advertising outcomes which don't materialise for their students.

Unfortunately it seems there are no consequences for the universities, and it's not hard to make those qualifications seem both alluring and lucrative.

There's got to be a way to hold them to account for the countless graduates who don't end up finding industry positions.

In my experience, good candidates (including interns/juniors) are still landing the roles. Hiring in tech/design/product is tough because there's a deluge of applicants who've either coasted during the boom, or been sold a lie by an educational institution.

You can spot the ones who apply for 40 jobs a week, and those who've used chatGPT a mile off, and they're usually the worst candidates, with long, bland, unfocused resumes.

LinkedIn is full of my worst ex-colleagues bemoaning the lack of opportunities, like they're entitled to it.

Please tell me if I'm being unfair. Maybe I should be less cynical.