Hello once again! I wanted to show y'all some pictures, because today we've hosted our first event.

Check it out!

Today's event is a birthday party for a little girl, her family and friends are all here setting up for a meal and they've got a neat inflatable for the kids to play on. She's turning 2 and folks decided to just go all out for it.

I wanted to share too, how this event is helping out the overall plan. The little girl's grandmother was a caterer before they moved here. She doesn't want to do catering professionally anymore, because the job wore her out. She stopped doing it after they moved, because she was exhausted. The way she tells it, it's a pretty typical story of being worked to the bone for rewards that aren't fulfilling, for a larger business that was mostly just about growth/performance. Turned her off to the whole idea, because she was sick of being pushed past her limits. We got to talking with her and shared some of our own plans - to be a local space, small scale and low key, not trying to grow super fast or get bought by something bigger.

As we shared all this I noticed her grandmother's demeanor change, what was at first a negative recollection turned into a sort of hopeful interest. Turns out she would like to do catering again, she'd just like to do it without the pressures of a larger scale business. I said at one point, that our goal was to be a good place, not the biggest business or the richest people. She gave me her number, and said to reach her whenever we wanted.

I couldn't ask for a better outcome on this one, I think. They paid early too :). Anyway, I don't have just a whole lot more to say, I just wanted to show y'all some progress since I'd already written out so much. Slowly but surely, step by step, it's working out so far. Hope y'all's weekend is good, and I hope to show you more soon!

I wanted to give an update to something I wrote about a while back, because i have something to show for it and wanted to express some gratitude.

Behold!

I used the eraser tool on the bottom part, we have a business line but we're not open yet. When we are I'll have some more pictures and it'll be included.

That old post was the first time I had committed most of that to writing, and it was really encouraging for folks to take an interest, especially Akir's questions. Being asked and writing out the answers helped me clarify further, what I was intending to do and how I would get there. So, for the folks who read that, I wanted to share an update.

I'm really confident about this endeavor. It makes me anxious to say that but I've come to learn the position we're in just could not be better. Part of getting it started is forming an LLC, so I've gotten some time to talk with folks more professionally connected to the town. From what I gather, we don't actually have much direct competition. That's because the local venues are very high priced, and primarily do weddings. With some of them, it sounds like a case of possibly resting on laurels - one story was of a wedding, $10,000, which did not include things like tables and chairs and the house was not clean. Each venue charges quite a lot, I think because they're renting out most of their own supplies. We don't have to do that - we have enough already to accommodate up to around 150 people, and the space can accommodate up to ~350 if they're hanging out outside. We can do an event like that 10k wedding for around 3k with stuff provided.

No one offers stuff that's smaller scale. At least with all the places I researched, it's just weddings. No one really tries to host things like, say, a dinner for a local business, school groups, smaller parties. The first event we're set to do, is a tea party for around 30 people (it's for a little girl's birthday). I got to speak with someone who owns a local accounting firm, and learned from them what we are planning to do is pretty much an unserved market. Folks want to be able to go someplace nice that isn't a restaurant. The lowest priced venue sits around ~$3500, and that's just the price of being there. Bear in mind, this is Brookhaven, MS - it isn't a wealthy place by any stretch. The venues currently operating seem to be relying on folks finding them online, and catering to those higher end kinds of events (again, it's mostly just weddings. Some of them do bed and breakfast but it's clearly not what their branding is about). We have practically no overhead, no loans, no investors, and our plan targets stuff that isn't available but is in regular demand. We're doing a few small events to get some practical knowledge and in May we'll open officially.

There's a separate story in there, of two independent folks figuring out how to live together. Neither of us is used to having someone around to do things. Changing my environment has meant being more productive and motivated, which has been pretty nice. Grandma rocks, that's really all there is to it. It really feels like having chosen to do something at precisely the right time, at least with respect to making the business work. I can't speak to the more lofty goals and ideals, because I haven't gotten far enough yet for those to really enter the picture. Upcoming: Business cards, a pamphlet, posters. There's opportunities for advertising that are either free or quite cheap. The print shop owner can get an ad out to 10,000 in the local area for around $500, which I think will have to be good because they're the only folks doing a mailer. That's the only consistent issue, things just move more slowly here and choice is extremely limited. I came here from a city of ~1m, so I guess I had gotten pretty used to having about a bajillion choices. On the other hand, it's been very easy to get the beginnings of a professional network going. I grew up in a place like this, so getting along is no big deal, and everybody knows everybody. A good first impression means something; a good conversation travels. Folks have loved the idea thus far, and have been nothing but encouraging. I don't ramble about the long term plan with anyone, ya'll are the only folk who really got that. As I go along I intend to see how that all shakes out, give an account of how it takes shape. I appreciate folks checking it out and responding. Happy to report anything you're interested in.

Anyway, that is it for now. I hope to return with some cool stuff from a big reopening party. I wasn't sure where this should go so I figured ~misc would work.

This hit me while watching the latest Gamers Nexus video discussion with Wendell, and Steve recited the quote.

It's often brought up as the inevitability of modern product ownership as company executives push profit-first practices like subscriptions, licenses and anti-right-to-repair designs. However this neglects the fact that these systems don't come from nowhere - they have to be built by programmers, engineers and designers.

I don't know if those same people support right-to-repair and freedom to manipulate what you buy in their private lives (or if they have even thought about it), but it seems like every techie I speak to does support it, yet somehow these things keep getting made.

I want to try and escape my bubble about this. I don't believe the engineers are powerless against the executives - if the engineering community works together and don't backstab, I think these systems can be prevented at the technical level and never see the light of day.

What happens at these notorious companies (John Deere, Apple etc.) that I'm missing? Is the lure of money too great? Is the threat of being back stabbed too large?

Hey Tildes,

I work at an international company which, over the course of COVID, probably had a turnover rate of 80% over two-three years. This was less due to the company, and more due to the incredibly restrictive COVID policies that the country we are located in tried to enforce. I was brought on in 2020, and due to the hemorrhaging of long term employees, a large gap in institutional knowledge was created.

We aren't a tech company, and use Google Workspace/Drive for a lot of our storage and documentation. Within my department I recently put in a lot of effort to create a file organization structure and proper documentation so that we would no longer lose resources and knowledge when people left - and a main purpose was to make it as easy for people to use, cut down on work, find information faster, and provide an easy way to leave with a bunch of resources if they wanted to move to a different company (we aren't in a field where we really compete with others or would lose an intellectual property). It was received with a ton of positive feedback from my peers and direct superiors.

This effort was recently noticed by management and I have been tasked with providing a rollout plan to get the entire organization on a similar structure with documentation processes for every department. My issue is, how does one enforce usage and standardization of documentation and following a certain file organizational structure? While I can think of a ton of ways to structure my process, communicate, and demonstrate the benefits to people, I know that there will be resistance (and in some cases, non-compliance) from staff. I am more than willing to work with them, provide training, and do a lot of the leg work myself, but I am wondering if anyone here has gone through something similar and has good strategies on what I can only describe as leading without authority.

My initial plan was to use the results from my department to get the more enthusiastic departments on board first, and then hopefully good word will spread to help reduce friction with other departments that may be more resistance and not as technologically inclined. However, I know that no matter what I do, I will hit resistance at some point.

The only two times I have had a similar task at a previous employer I had absolute full reign over everything, and it was a completely solo endeavour, or was working with such a small tight-knit group that I didn't have to worry about non-compliance. This is my first time working on such a project in a larger organization and could really use tips from others experience.

I'm trying to not dox myself here - but hope I provided enough information to get some overall tips and comments.

It feels like in the last few years so many companies are becoming incredibly greedy in a chance to try and raise profits and please the shareholders, companies hoping that people will comply as they have no choice and give away more of their money to allow these companies to make record levels of profits.

It seems like people are getting less and less and what they have left the companies just want more and more from everyone. I'm not referencing any specific company here but I have seen these trends in the last couple of years get a lot worse.

Customer Impact

• Raising prices there is some valid reasons to raise prices, but sometimes prices are raised just as a way to make more money quickly.
• Quality reduction it feels like companies are asking more money for less quality goods more than ever.
• Excessive manipulative marketing especially on social media and other playes which can misleed people.
• Data explotation companies mis-using peoples data just so they can make some quick money.

Employee Impact

• Wage stagnation Despite the soaring profits many companies refusing to increase wages, leading to financial insecurity.
• Unfair labor practices Companies expecting more from their employees for less money basically.
• Job insecurity replacing workers with automation and outsourcing to cut costs.
• Mental health high pressure enviroments to force profit-driven companies causing record levels of mental health issues.

Society and Enviromental Impact

• Polluting Companies prioritising profits over the enviroment leading to pollution, waste etc
• Economic Inequality Coporate greed leading to income disparities, undermining social coheison.
• Unfair influence on policy Companies using their power and wealth to influence policy making

My question is, when is enough is enough? At what stage should something be done? Anything? to stop corporate greed from runing society?

In this post, I'm going to say something which might seem controversial, politically incorrect or even downright harsh to some of you. Feel free to let me know and express your strong disagreement if that's the case. Everyone's world view is different and I'm ever ready to adjust my own in light of new found facts and evidences.

What I'm observing these days is that many big tech companies and large corporations are pushing lot's of content on Linkedin, Twitter, etc. which conveys the idea that these companies are standing up for the rights of supposedly oppressed section of the masses (females, minorities, etc.). 8 out of 10 postings from them are typically about these, a group picture of women employees, retweets or likes of those who have posted on new joining and promotions, etc.

With all due respect, the problem here isn't with the virtues of women empowerment, etc., needless to say these are good things to be celebrated in a society. But the problem is with their approach. When 8 out of 10 posts are only on these topics, the impression or narrative being pushed becomes that the world at large is very cruel and gruesome whereas these large capitalists are the ones who are implementing just rules and ethics on that world. Do you think this narrative or story they're selling is based on any factual reality?

I've seen and experienced a fair part of that "world at large" myself and while there are indeed many problems with it and it's far from perfect, it's a bit rich of these capitalists to make that kind of narrative signaling when, in fact, they're the ones who are partly responsible for keeping it ever poor and oppressed. These companies have the highest privileges of the world and they profit out of a crony system that thrives and benefits from the gates which keep the competition away.

Now, I'm not one of those "ancap" dudes who blatantly cancels capitalism entirely. Oh no, we all do need capitalism, not only because it's a system that pays your salaries and bills but also because the alternative is much worse and we have seen what it did in Russia and Korea and China. I just wish capitalism was more inclusive and of the Adam Smithian Laissez Faire and free competition kind and less of the big tech and surveillance capitalism kind.

This constant narrative pushing by the corporates, in effect, keeps people distracted from this truly bad aspect of capitalism. The masses are gullible, they can't see it, but the people sitting at top positions in these companies should know better. What kind of society are they trying to create with this? These companies have nothing to fear. Even if the masses actually realized and start thinking about this problem, they're hardly in a position to do anything about it. The way our rigid systems are designed and work, I don't see it changing for at least decades, if not centuries. But I wish these brands stop pushing on the narrative front in the meantime. In fact, the only thing that will change is make them more trustworthy in the eyes of wise people in the society, that's what I think.

With the ever-growing stream of acquisitions and mergers, it got me thinking: Why do we permit companies to do this?

What would the harm be in banning this practice? If a company is becomes insolvent, release all of it's IP to the public domain, dissolve all patents/trademarks, and sell off physical assets to pay debtors (first of which should be former employees IMO, but that's a separate discussion).

Edit: I think my original intention of the post to kick off some interesting discussion has worked. Thank you to all current and future posters!

Beyond changing work-at-home policies. Diversity? Work/life balance? Team dynamics? Hiring practices?

What caused the change? Was this an ongoing conversation and recent events just lit a fire under it, or is it a new corporate strategy?

Reading HackerNews and saw that some mentorship software launched: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20656223 and someone mentioned another software as a service that does mentorship: https://mentorloop.com/

Now I'm wondering where the mentorship for leftists and leftist organizing is.

And I'm wondering if anyone else feels like most of the good ideas that leftists have slowly trickle into businesses but in ways that can be controlled by executives/managers. Their "features" include these slogans:

Tools to Turn Human Resources into Superheroes

Don't let employees slip through the cracks
Stay on top of hundreds to thousands of mentoring interactions in a way that still feels personal. Check in on employee relationships, give them the right nudges they need.

What's your take? Is there a need for more mentorship and peer to peer training/collaboration amongst anarchists and communists? Is that realistic? Or is this something that we just need to be on the defense against and form our own networks outside these systems of control?

Tweetstorm related: https://twitter.com/bioxcession/status/1028322450910732289

Upfront: the basic premise of the book is that Theranos was an exploitative, evil company headed by two exploitative, evil people. It makes an effort to not apologize for Elizabeth, or blame her actions on anyone else. She was sucked into the vortex of literally being a bloodsucker. In fact, the book - at one point - goes so far as to suggest she may be a sociopath.

Now, the book was a good read, and I think the point makes sense - bad company is bad. But it's stirring up a ton of music in my head - especially since it compared Theranos to "vaporware companies" - practices that the Valley has engaged in since forever (promising endlessly and not delivering).

Vaporware: software or hardware that has been advertised but is not yet available to buy, either because it is only a concept or because it is still being written or designed.

Theranos was no different, except it tried selling vaporware in the form of a healthcare device. Insisting that this device worked (it didn't), and insisting that most of their received blood tests were running on it (they weren't).

It's my opinion that Theranos would have been hailed as an enormous success if they had delayed for long enough to make this technology work. I believe that my point is furthered by the fact that Walgreens waited through two years of delays, of and tolerated outright lies. If the tech ever came out, all would have been forgiven.

My argument boils down to this: Elizabeth wasn't a shitty person, she operated correctly in a shitty system.

She took risks, yes - but they were necessary to maintain the illusion that she had a product that amounted to anything. Eventually, she hoped, her team would crack the nut and she'd come out unscathed.

The problem amounts to our system encouraging this type of behavior - she was visited by the vice president, Kissinger, Mattis, had dinners with the Clintons, and was a fellow at Harvard medical school. Nobody thought twice because the tech was so exciting.

Tildes, what can we do to prevent this type of behavior, and am I overlooking something?

Well hello,
I'm still learning about the blockchain day by day and it's quit interesting to try to "predict" the future use of this technology. But i have my own doubts.(maybe I'm still lacking in research)

1. If everything will be decentralised, how will you make the profit out of it?(business point of view)
2. If you have million dollar today to work on blockchain technology what business would you get into to get appropriate profit in near future?(Of course excluding those exchange of cryptos)
   P.S: You are not a tech company and just want to enter in the field.

As we've seen, Apple has shown it's willingness to agree with the Chinese government's wishes several times. First by not allowing users of it's Chinese app store to download VPNs, then taking Skype off the Mainland China app store, as well as handing over control of Chinese iCloud operations to a Chinese firm, and also by removing apps with call kit in them from the Chinese app store.

Now, we should also note that Apple makes quite a bit of money from China. According to Apple's latest earnings call [PDF] for Q1 2018, they made $17.956 billion from China. So, this strategy seems to be working.

Discussion Questions

In what ways are Apple accommodating the Chinese government a necessity?

In this case, or others, when should Apple take into consideration the desires of their customers over their investors?

What problems can be had from accommodating China, but not being so accommodating to other governments?

What can other companies learn from Apple's dealing with the Chinese government?