Absolutely 100% this.

To be totally blunt, this doesn’t need political backing. This requires people collectively coming together, forming unions with single-focus, and pushing for an increase in pay to align with the cost of living. Hell, if anything it’s better if Trump and his lackies oppose this, because you ultimately have the power to cripple these businesses via strikes, forming your own cooperatives off the back of your soon-to-be previous employers, or simply signalling to businesses that if they cannot afford to pay people enough money they shouldn’t be in business.

Push for gradual increase year-on-year until pay is aligned. If this is missed, everyone walks. Push for the removal of limited sick pay, and for 25+ days minimum vacation time a year. Leave it at that, and you’ve got terms that 90% of workers will agree to. Can’t get a single company to agree? Create a professional body for your line of work and promote it as the place to be for those in your field. Push for accreditation for roles, and shun those that avoid it.

I had discussed it with my wife. I didn’t want her to feel obligated to do so, and I know it would be awkward at her work to change her last name, but ultimately she wanted to - so I guess that’s one reason?

There is a degree of closeness from it that I think some people appreciate. If you all share a last name, perhaps you feel closer as a family? I’ve known some people that don’t share the same last name as their kids, or people that went double-barrelled, but didn’t with their kids, and some of them had either changed later, or regretted not having the “same” name.

You only need to look at the many BlueSky posts here to see that many people view BlueSky as an attack on federation. It’s only natural to see people on Mastodon shitting on BlueSky for taking what they see as their success away from them.

The McMahons are so weird.

It’s kinda funny how Vince funded two failed campaigns, and the second the two seem to be estranged Linda has found political power through Trump.

I have no idea if Vince and Linda are still together, since they’ve been mostly separated for years now, but I wonder if this will also open doors for Vince considering he was booted out of TKO/WWE for the recent abus allegations.

It’s sad that these arguments are still being shared. It was the same arguments years ago from people that would just assume that a free cert was inherently unsafe.

Is it web scale?

While I definitely agree, enough momentum going both ways, alongside perhaps people choosing to leave Mastodon and Threads to go to the “winner of the alternatives” could sway this to a point where BlueSky is no longer the minnow here. Given that we’re only weeks detached from Trump’s win, I can only see it getting worse for Twitter, to the point where I can see Elon just selling it and moving on - perhaps even to BlueSky if Jack wanted a cut price deal.

Eh, BlueSky seems to be actually gaining some traction now, enough so that celebs and brands are jumping ship, so maybe just give it a few months and let it rot.

I had predicted this a while back, in that enabling Trump meant victory for the GOP, but the total erosion of Conservative values. This is clear in that any career politician will likely cede power to a bunch of nutjobs or meme lords with money.

They can either shut up and let Trump do his thing (lol), or they can dig their heels in and fight his decisions from within, grinding government to a halt (also lol). Either way, it’s a win for most, because in the long term the right will bail after Trump and leave a party so weak that it probably won’t be able to fight off the memory of Trump. He’ll never endorse a candidate that’s not himself, especially if the GOP blocks him. His rabid fan base will either die out, or go third-party because the GOP is “too woke” or something.

Because none of those points matter to the average user.

You can be as obtuse as you want. You know I’m right, and it’s exactly why legislation is needed to ensure these things are done correctly to stop businesses from exploiting the rules.

It’s a simple solution to what’s a more nuanced problem.

Be honest. If faced with the choice to cut hours/roles, move roles overseas, or to “pay more”, do you think many business owners will do the latter?

You need to consider the nuance here, otherwise you find a similar situation to the minimum wage rises, where businesses complain about the operations not being viable because they need to start treating workers like humans.

While true, there are some complications to this:

• Unsociable hours usually require more pay
• If you’re already working 40 hours a week, focusing on stuff out of hours is going to be hard. I know this all too well!

IMO, this is EXACTLY where outsourcing should be used. Either move someone from the US (or your home country) to where you need support, ensure you have a good triage system for issues that might come up, etc.

There are a lot of jobs that require out of hours support, specifically those that aren’t tied to business hours. In tech at least, many of the sites and services you use are built off the backs of software engineers that are paged at 5am because latency is a little higher than normal.

I don’t raise this to say that this rule is bullshit, but to say that there are a lot of arguments that will be used to push people to work longer than their allotted hours. IMO this is absolutely required, but I would go further and say that any contact outside of working hours implies a working contract, and guarantees that the employee is paid for the disruption caused. That includes on-call too, which is often unpaid.

Labor laws in the US are, frankly, hilariously bad. You deserve unlimited sick pay, at least 25 days holiday (separate from sick leave), and the removal of at-will employment. What is described here is the bare minimum of what you should have.

I’m sure that everyone speaking out now probably said the exact same things back then…

It’s not really a Green Day thing, but there were some dodgy allegations regarding sexual assault from the main guy’s son, who is a drummer in another band.

I got downvoted hard for saying this before, but while I don’t think the UK would get all of it’s benefits back, I think that they would get to retain some privileges - at the cost of others.

It’s not because the UK is great or anything. The sole reason I believe the EU would welcome back the UK with open arms is to keep the UK as a friendly example of how badly your economy can fuck up after leaving. History shows that you don’t kick someone when they’re down, you bring them back, and form them into a useful ally.

IMO, the same deal wouldn’t make sense anyway, because the UK is far weaker than they were previously. Let the UK keep the pound, but lose any special veto rights they once had.

Despite spending around 15 years on Reddit, I found it surprisingly easy to quit. I do miss some niche subreddits that just won’t get traction here, but overall my switch to Lemmy worked out for the best.

With that being said, Reddit is still going strong, and you’re deluded if you think this will change their IPO fortunes. The quality will plummet, but once the shares are owned and sold they won’t care.

So, I work at Amazon, and that comment is very misleading.

Amazon obviously pay less outside of the US, but one of the core reasons they hire in the US, Canada, and India is because there are far fewer protections for worker’s rights. It’s absolutely not about cost, because otherwise they would probably also increase roles across Europe. In the UK, you’d be very lucky to find a role compared to most smaller US locations, and many people believe it’s because it’s been far harder to lay people off. The same goes for locations across France, Spain, and Germany. Big tech in general is downsizing across Europe.

I also 100% call bullshit on the remote point. Everyone is back 3 days a week, worldwide. If anything, the rules in India regarding RTO are far harsher than anywhere else.

US software engineers get paid far better than us outside of the US, but if Amazon truly cared about cost, they would’ve moved lots of roles away years ago.

The problem social media has is twofold.

People like open social networks. Laugh all you want, but that includes Lemmy. Many people don’t have active social interactions in their life, and social media allows them to talk, share, and discuss with people. The problem is that the users ARE the network, and even the best social networks took years to get their user base up. The monopoly on social media is very hard to break, and most newer networks either rely on gimmicks, or are closed to smaller networks.

The second problem is that the world is so polarising that moderating is expensive. In-person moderation is still by far the best way to do this, but it doesn’t scale well, and companies have no incentive to keep their networks hate-free. Furthermore, the sort of person that is going to own a social network with a holding company floated on the stock market is likely going to have polarising opinions themselves - so good luck getting them to do the right thing and spend money on tens of thousands of people worldwide that will need to sift through the shite reported on social media, and good luck in doing this in a way that is high quality.

Honestly, I think social media won’t die out. I think we’ll see newer networks emerge over time, but they will work around people and work on these problems first, instead of launching and hoping/praying for traction.