I no longer trust my work calendar.

First, colleagues reschedule meetings when we need to meet on a topic again. For example, a meeting held this morning at 10:00 ET had an outcome of meeting again tomorrow. Instead of scheduling a new meeting, the organizer rescheduled it to tomorrow.

Second, corporate migrated/is migrating to a new email system. Everything in the old system is still there in the old system. None of it transferred.

Third, the desktop, web browser, and mobile calendars loose synchronization. For example, last week I saw the same meeting scheduled for 2 different times depending on the platform. Luckily I noticed the difference and was able to confirm with colleagues about the actual start time.

Lastly, the work calendar relies on multiple internal corporate systems. Which internal corporate systems seems to depend on how the work calendar is accessed. Some of this might help explain , but right now a outage on another system impacts my ability to get at my schedule.

What does all this mean?

Keeping with the idea that “Plain Text Rulz!”, I am using my iOS Shortcut and the Beorg app to dump the next & current day’s schedule into org files so I will have a more reliable record of my comings, goings, and doings.

I will back it up with my analog daily journal. I used to keep my work schedule this way back when I worked in Japan but dropped the habit.

※ I do not share my iOS shortcut as is but might share a sanitized version if requested.

Ugh. It happened again. Parts of the world changed their clocks because it was 02:00 local time.

When I lived in Japan I got to experience the joy of one time zone in the whole country that does not change twice a year. It was glorious.

However, I did have to invest in blackout curtains because sunrise was around 04:30 in the summer. With the longer morning-side day still came a longer evening-side day, and the earlier peak day heat meant that maybe it would dissipate enough in time for a nice evening.

Daylight savings time needs to go away – kind of.

With countries as big East to West as the continental US, Mexico,and Canada, how to get rid of DST becomes problematic.

My favorite idea is, in autumn, to merge Eastern, and Central time into one time zone, combine Mountain and Pacific into another, and Alaska and Hawaii into a third.

Central and Mountain time zones would do nothing. Eastern would “fall” back to aline with Central Daylight time. Pacific time will “spring” ahead (for the second time in the year) to align with Mountain.

Most of Alaska stays on Alaska Standard Time. The rest of Alaska and Hawaii permanently “springs” ahead to Hawaii-Aleutian Daylight Time.

If my math is right (and there is zero guarantee that it is) the newly created Eastern time zone and the new Western time zone would be 1 hour different from each other – 10 AM in Toronto would be 09 AM in Los Angeles, 10 AM in Chicago would be 09 AM in Denver, and 10 AM in New York would be 9 AM in Mexico City. All of Alaska and Hawaii would be 2 hours behind Los Angeles and 3 hours behind New York: a 5 PM meeting in Detroit would be 4 PM in Phoenix, and 2 PM in Anchorage and Honolulu.

Coming out of this the US would have 3 time zones (mostly), Mexico would have 2, and Canada would have 3. South America would ideally similarly simplify.

Quartz has a good article about this from 10 years ago: https://qz.com/142199/the-us-needs-to-retire-daylight-savings-and-just-have-two-time-zones-one-hour-apart/. Disappointingly, it only focused on the continental US with some through to Alaska and Hawaii.

UPDATE: I thought Atlantic was 0:30 off of Eastern time when I wrote this. I was wrong and adjusted things accordingly.

Musk and Bezo Show the Perils of Plutocratic Pettiness:

Let me get nerdy for a minute. At least since the work of Max Weber a century ago, social scientists have realized that social inequality has multiple dimensions. At minimum we need to distinguish between the hierarchy of money, in which some people have a disproportionate share of society’s wealth, and the hierarchy of prestige, in which some people are specially respected and looked up to.

People may occupy very different positions in these hierarchies. Sports legends, pop stars, social media “influencers” and, yes, Nobel laureates generally do fine financially, but their wealth is surely mere pocket change compared with today’s great fortunes. Billionaires, by contrast, command deference, even servility, from those who depend on their largess, but few of them are widely known public figures and even fewer have dedicated fan bases.

The tech elite, however, had it all. Facebook’s Sheryl Sandberg was, for a while, a feminist icon. Musk has millions of Twitter followers, many of them actual human beings rather than bots, and these followers have often been ardent Tesla defenders.

Now the glitter is gone. Social media, once hailed as a force for freedom, are now denounced as vectors of misinformation. Tesla boosterism has been dented by tales of spontaneous combustion and autopilot accidents. Technology moguls still possess vast wealth, but the public — and the administration — isn’t offering the old level of adulation.

And it’s driving them crazy.

Tl;dr: Don’t pin hopes on these petty tech moguls.

I have a post from last year that says basically the same thing but I cannot find it.

Unnecessary meetings are a $100 million mistake ($) at big companies, according to a new survey that shows workers probably don’t need to be in nearly a third of the appointments they attend.

Via Bloomberg

Let’s be clear – layoffs is a euphemism for the mass firing of people. The difference is that when one is “laid off” it’s not necessarily because anyone “let go” did anything wrong or damaging in their job. That’s being fired for cause, and that’s not often an “innocent until proven guilty” situation, but that’s another post for another day.

Note that layoffs impact middle management down. Upper management and up do not suffer such indignities.

Layoffs don’t only impact the person formerly employed. It ripples out to their family, their community, their social circle, and so on. That some organizations treat it flippantly casual is beyond reprehensible.

I have some works on surviving layoffs: Preparing for the Pink (Slip) based on my experience and research, though it is a bit long in the tooth. And Cate over at Accidentally In Code has some great stuff, too, about taking hold of your career.

Axios Login: Tech layoffs’ toll:

1 big thing: What to expect when your tech firm is downsizing

As Silicon Valley and the broader tech industry face a season of layoffs, workers are unprepared for the ordeal and management has little experience with the wrenching process, Axios’ Scott Rosenberg reports.

Driving the news: Meta is expected to announce large-scale job cuts as soon as Wednesday, the first ever in its history. That comes on the heels of major layoffs at Twitter and many other flagship tech firms.

Why it matters: At most companies, layoffs are a business decision for top execs but a deeply personal experience for everyone else.

The big picture: The industry’s phenomenal 20-year run of largely unimpeded growth means that most of its workforce doesn’t have much idea of what to expect from widespread layoffs. Here’s a brief guide.

1. For those laid off, the pain is personal.

  • Even in the best cases, where a company has carefully selected who gets the axe and applied sensitivity to the process, people who are let go can feel a sense of failure — even though, typically, the actual failure belonged to the company and its management.

Having been laid off myself once, I know that in my case it was entirely due to mismanagement, a lack of leadership, and weak governance.

  • The worst cases — as with Twitter’s reportedly 50% cuts last week, made by a new ownership team with little preparation or apparent care — create a broader kind of sorrow among a workforce as well.

I’ll not waste more electrons on EMu’s clusterfuck, at least for the moment.

2. While no one should shed tears for the managers, they’re having a hard time too.

  • Middle managers often find themselves having to select winners and losers from groups of people they handpicked to join their teams not that long ago.
  • Then, they have to face the people who are left and help them through what can be extended bouts of anger, depression and survivor’s guilt.
  • Workers and managers both face bigger workloads under post-layoff do-more-with-less mandates.

When I was a manager I never had to do large scale layoffs. I’m thankful of that but also I did a lot to make sure I did not find myself in that position. It didn’t help me retain my job, disappointingly.

Also, if I had to fire a large part of my team I would have not done well. While I received “leadership” training, very little of that was about the nuts and bolts of how managing people works and none of it covered firing people.

3. For companies, layoffs leave slow-healing psychic wounds.

  • Tech companies often aim to inspire workers with mission statements and caring rhetoric. But once a firm has gone through a round of layoffs, it becomes effectively impossible to persuade employees that anything matters beyond the bottom line.

Never trust in a founder/CEO/evangelist, especially if they’re charismatic &| inconsistent.

  • After big rounds of layoffs, tech leaders can’t just move on as if nothing happened. They also have to try to rekindle workers’ belief that the organization can do big things.

See above.

Between the lines: Layoffs that are tied to the shutdown of a specific product line or division can be written off as strategic in nature. Broader layoffs are a sign that a company grew too fast, took too many risky bets, or just never hit overly ambitious goals.

  • Many tech companies overhired during the pandemic and now face tougher times.
  • The people responsible for such choices are rarely the people who lose their jobs — though sometimes, as in Twitter’s case, layoffs are made by a new management with a belt-tightening agenda.

All of the above cop-outs – rapid growth, risky bets, ambitious goals – are tell-take signs of a lack of basic business fundamentals, starting with a business plan and governance. Sadly, there’s no Sarbaines-Oxley legislation for a lack of planning and competence.

Not to say that these tech companies don’t have good people in key roles, but if Operations and Finance and Marketing aren’t all aligned and operating with enlightened self-interest (a rare commodity, to be sure) in the absence of business fundamentals, this is the shit that happens, IMHO.

To be sure, many tech workers have been generously paid and are relatively well-off compared with other industries. But losing your job is still losing your job.

Amen.

Scott’s thought bubble: I’m a veteran of a dotcom era startup that went public and then laid off half its staff more than two decades ago, and I still get flashbacks.

  • You never forget these experiences, and this year’s cuts could reshape how a generation in tech thinks about their careers.

I was laid off from my management role almost 10 years ago and I’m still reluctant to go back into a similar role. And I still plan my finances with the possibility I’ll be laid-off again.

Yes, but: When laid-off developers filled the coffeeshops of San Francisco and other tech hubs after the bust in 2000-2001, they used their newfound don’t-give-a-damn state to hatch passion-project ideas.

  • Some of them took off and sparked the next boom. That could happen again.

We’ve seen this before and we will see it again. If I were a tech-reliant business I’d be taking advantage of the talent suddenly on the market – but not to grow things too fast.

I don’t need to tell you who he is. … Think of him as the ultimate troll. A billion-dollar troll. King of the Trollkin, that guy.

Maybe he’ll do right by Twitter. Maybe he’ll make it better. Or maybe he’ll give it autopilot and it’ll crash into an orphanage. I’m betting on the latter.

The question is, what do you do about it?

I don’t know.

I really don’t.

(Via Chuck Wendig)

Punching him in his very punchable face is not an option, sadly.

I’ll continue to use the service as a way of altering folks to my musings here (and my new endeavor — stay tuned).

Some reading material, if you care to have it:

Fonda Lee: Twitter Is The Worst Reader

Kacen Callendar: The Humanization Of Authors

Caitlin Flanagan: You Really Need To Quit Twitter

And finally, something else from me (I know, sorry): Does Social Media Sell Books? A Vital Inquisition!

Newsletters are the new podcasts – everyone seems to have one.

The difference is the cost – the podcasts to which I subscribe are free and ask you to contribute; most of the newsletters I read are behind a paywall some or most of the time. As mentioned elsewhere, I do not subscribe to Spotify or whatever corporate matryoshka doll Earwolf is now under.

To what non-tech non-sec newsletters do I subscribe, what do they cover, and why do I subscribe? I subscribe to many, but these are some of the standouts:

  • Money Stuff by Matt Levine via Bloomberg. :finance:business:
  • The Honest Broker by Ted Gioia via Substack. :music:culture:
  • NextDraft by Dave Pell :news:
  • The Overspill by Charles Arthur :news:
  • The Poynter Report by Tom Jones via Poynter :journalism:news:
  • What’s in my … via Revue :edc:tools: “Each week, one interesting person shares four favorite things in their bag or in their desk or fridge or closet or wherever they keep things.”
  • Weekly Musings by Scott Nesbitt :misc: “a published-every-seven-days (or so) letter from the keyboard of writer Scott Nesbitt. Each Wednesday, this letter shares my thoughts about something that’s caught my interest. Those thoughts will inform, infuriate, amuse, and I hope enlighten you. Even if just a little bit.”
  • Culture Study by Anne Helen Petersen via Substack :culture: “Think more about the culture that surrounds you”
  • Axios Nashville & a bunch of other Axios newsletters
  • Austin Kleon via Substack :art:culture: “Weekly art, writing, and creative inspiration from the author of Steal Like an Artist and other bestsellers”

This list will continue to evolve as I narrow, whittle, and refine. I get various newsletters from the periodicals to which I subscribe. To be clear, the only newsletters I “pay” for are part of a periodical subscription. That may change.

Thor Vikström has gotten countless calls from developers wanting to buy his seven-acre island that he can see from his Quebec home. He has owned the island since the 1960s, and fiercely protects it as a natural habitat.

Developers pleaded with him to sell so they could build roads, high-rises and bridges on it, he said.

“You think you’re going to destroy my island with that stupidity?” he recalled responding to the developers, who opened their bids decades ago at $500,000.

(Via WaPo article)

Where I live developers are running roughshod over local governments, community groups, neighborhood associations, and any opposition to their unquenchable desire for more and more land under their terms.

Thus I love this story.

YMMV