converting these buildings to homes would solve a lot these issues. Local business can’t survive from locals? What about the inverse of the increased economic activity in the community these workers live in instead of commute to? There has to be solutions that work for everyone besides forcing everyone back to office.
The same people wailing about their commercial real estate investments going south will probably start wailing about their residential investments going south if a glut of residential property was released onto the market from relaxed zoning. The only solution according to the MSM is going to amount to communism for property investors.
Working from home has increased my physical activity. I'm able to go to parks and walking trails near by during breaks. Weight lift during lunch break and since I no longer lose 2 hours a day to commuting I'm able play sports like golf and hockey more frequently, not relying only on weekends to do these sports is amazing. Golf more because I am available more during day light time and hockey more because I am able to get other things done which frees up my night time.
I somehow envision working at some of the top tech companies in the world requires more than just being good at coding exercises. And more than just software engineers were let go at these companies…
Isn’t depression period at an all time high? When ever depression is explored or written about it’s always in the context of females and not males. At least from what I see. Everyone knows boys and men have a really hard time with mental health but nothing is really done about it. Man up as they say. I wish the conversation was evenly distributed.
They talk about the boys... at least enough to say the girls have twice the rate of depression, that the boys' depression can manifest as aggression, and that these teen boys are victimizing the girls sexually.
It's from surveys, as far as I can tell, so attempts to compare results with anything except same results for previous years for the same sub-group needs a giant asterisk next to it (and even comparing across years is iffy, depending on what conclusions you're trying to draw).
Twice the rate of self-reported, when asked persistent sadness, as boys' also self-reported rate, then.
Hell, the article even kinda covers this, noting that boys' depression may not be experienced as persistent sadness. And that's before we consider biases in tendency to report such things to begin with, which may (to put it lightly) differ between the sexes.
(Nb. it may well in-fact be true that girls are experiencing depression at double the rate of boys—but a survey's not enough to determine that)
On another topic:
> On a handful of topics, the survey results suggested teenagers were doing better than in previous years. They reported lower rates of illicit drug use and bullying at school, for example. And teenagers are having less sex, with fewer sexual partners, than in previous years.
I mean... the jokes write themselves. "No wonder they're all sad!"
Yes the article mentioned boys a few times but doesn't go into any depth. And its not so much this article its really the overall quantity of these types of articles that focus on female over male. Of course an article can focus on one or the other and that is fine but I find it just tends to be lopsided towards females.
I can't find major newspaper articles specifically focused on suicide among teenage boys, even though the rate of it is 400% higher than for teenage girls, and getting worse faster.
Yes, males have done about 80% of the teen suicides since basically always.
I can remember a handful of articles about boys struggling over the years but like your Yang example they have been on the opinion page and tainted with the whiff of "men's rights" grievances.
Everything seems to be getting worse. I get surprised when the media mentions anything developing in a positive direction. And it’s not about “the media” since that’s been a source of negativity forever. I mean, these last few years everything seems to be getting worse, and media bias doesn’t even factor much into it.
The conversation has definitely evolved to push back on it but in any practical sense its still "be a man". I feel that is the general expectation of males.
I think a big contributor is the population boom of toronto. Canada has a high immigration rate and a lot of people seem to gravitate to toronto. The social services can’t stabilize or support the population.
It varied somewhat by region, but in Canada these policies typically included lengthy forced business shutdowns, severe education disruptions, delaying/cancelling medical procedures, curfews, forced masking, coerced and forced injections of unwanted substances, fearmongering by politicians and bureaucrats, violently suppressing peaceful protests, and so on.
These policies resulted in major economic harm (business closures, job losses, supply chain disruption, significant inflation, etc.), as well as widespread social harm in many different ways.
For further context: "dinosaurs" covers a time range MUCH longer than the time since they went extinct, i.e. enough time for almost all mammals and modern birds and darn near everything you can see today except crocodiles and horseshoe crabs to evolve.
There was a large variety. An extremely large variety. As much as we are understandably excited about feathers being a thing that we didn't realize earlier, in 100+ million years a lot of things evolve. They didn't all have feathers.
> enough time for almost all mammals and modern birds and darn near everything you can see today except crocodiles and horseshoe crabs to evolve.
I know what you're trying to say, but every living thing today, from the mammals to the fungus among us, have spent the same amount of time evolving, dating back to the first life, or at least the first life encoded for reproduction. Except for the birds, the dinosaurs quit early.
Whales evolved from small land mammals since about 50 million years (half the time since dinosaurs) (it took them more like 20 million, but I'm being generous because whales still exist).
100 million years is an extremely long time. A lot happens in that amount of time.
> 100 million years is an extremely long time. A lot happens in that amount of time.
during that period of time, the ancestors of every living thing on earth was also mutating and naturally selecting.
during the entire time the dinosaurs roamed the earth, the mammals and/or their ancestors were also evolving and saving up genetic endowment for being the fittest in every eventuality; sadly, the dinosaurs bet on the wrong ... horses.
The big famous ones got toasted, but one[1] of the small specie survived. A few decades ago, we realized that birds are the descendant of dinosaurs. (Or "birds are dinosaurs" if you prefer that classification.)
[1] One specie or a few species? I'm really curious about the current most popular hypothesis.
Regardless of whether this specific dinosaur is thought to have feathers or not, I was wondering if feathers would survive the fossilization in the first place? Is there anything intrinsic to feathers that would make them different in that regard, then, say, the skin (which apparently is relatively well preserved)?
Feathers have in fact "survived" fossilization, notably those attached to several whole-body archaeopteryx fossils (scare quotes around "survive" because the original material is gone, it is only the shape which survives)
Under very special preservation circumstances, feathers to fossilize. You can see some examples of dinosaur fossils in this Wikipedia article. If you search you can also find lots of bird feature fossils (avian dinosaurs).
I haven’t heard one person say they want to go back to office everyday of the week. Let alone majority of the week. When asked in a group at work everyone feels pressured to say they miss in office work but I really doubt anyone would say that if they knew it wouldn’t make them look bad.
I would be okay with once a week, or perhaps once a fortnight.
Sprint planning sessions can be hard to get everyone engaged, but it isn't impossible.
Retro can be remote, the biggest issue has been, is, and always will be teams that have no control and are dependent on other teams to do anything, don't write their own tickets and don't have an easily viewable plan that they can work towards.
