>the Third, Seventh, and Eleventh Circuit Courts of Appeal require number generation in order for technology to qualify as an ATDS. [...] The Second and Ninth Circuit Courts of Appeal, in contrast, have liberally construed the statutory text and do not require number generation.
Like most conversations with WFH, this wouldn't need to be an all-or-nothing proposition. I wouldn't want to live on the road forever. But I'd love to take three or four weeks a year and live somewhere entirely new and learn about a new culture. I'm sure there are some people that would want to travel more than that, and some that would want to travel less. The key is providing flexibility to allow people to live the life that they want for themselves.
DroidCam works for my requirements: http://www.dev47apps.com .. it installs a virtual webcam and microphone on Windows, and transmits the video and audio from the phone camera/microphone.
The Yeti is what I have. It's a condenser microphone. Condenser microphones generally are more sensitive to quiet sounds and pick up range a bit better, but that means they also pick up _everything_ else much better. That's great if you're in a sound studio, but most of us are not.
You'll make your life easiest if you get clean audio in _before_ you start trying to do further processing to clean it up.
I already had the Yeti on hand, and it was a couple days of tweaking and tuning to get to the point where it will pick up my voice from 6-8" away clearly (so it's not directly in front of my face on camera) but not also transmitting the pitter-patter of every raindrop on the sidewalk outside.
If you're looking for a mic just for audio/video calls, I'd look towards a dynamic mic. Something like the Audio-Technica AT2005 ($80) is generally pretty well reviewed, is 2/3 the price of the Yeti, and still includes a built-in ADC so you can just plug it in via USB and call the job done (don't need to add a bunch of input boxes/etc).
The details of the initial organization aren't public, but it's likely that it went in the other direction, as part of the pre-existing project CODE-CWA trying to convince software developers to unionize with them. There's no reason I can see that they would have had to join the CWA.
The advantage of affiliating with a larger organization is their weight becomes a part of your collective bargaining strength. That is, if Google does something the union doesn't like then the entire CWA might get mad at them. I don't know that there are any clear disadvantages from a union's perspective, which is why basically all organizing efforts do it.
From a bird's eye perspective, the disadvantage is that there's no meaningful competition or innovation, because all new unions see themselves as part of the traditional union movement where solidarity is prized. If someone else formed a competing union with a clever new idea for how to organize Google workers, the CWA-backed union would denounce it and demand that Google refuse to talk to the second union.
1) a substantial part of your dues are passed on to support the larger organization
2) some member services are delegated to the larger union, and some larger unions are better at member services than others
3) some larger unions spend a lot of money on political activism instead of member services
4) less independence of action, as larger unions might have different priorities than what ground level members want (e.g. wanting to get a contract settled instead of fighting for more; external organizing over internal organizing)
Oregonian here. The prices at Ace Hardware yesterday were $40 for a Doug Fir, and $65 for a Noble Fir. A couple years ago I think I paid $60 for a Doug Fir. But you can also just pay $5 to get a permit from the Forest Service and go cut down your own tree. There are some restrictions (no trees over 12', and there must be other trees within 20' for example) but it's fun to hunt your own tree down--even if the tree that you get isn't a perfectly triangular cone shape like you may get at a tree lot
Even five stories would let you get about double a density we have today. The typical Somerville home is two full stories and half a third story.
If it were legal to build much taller, though, I do think people would be happy to do that next to the subway stations. Yes, the cost goes up, but people are very interested in living right next to the station.
Not Silicon Valley or FAANG, but I'm a MechE that makes "non essential" consumer products. We're officially WFH until 2021, with lab access available as needed. Most of the time that I'm going in to the office is when I'm getting things from our 3D printers, modifying parts using the machine shop or other large power tools that I don't have at home, or running tests. It probably works out to 1-2 days/week on average, but varies greatly depending on what's going on. We also have the opportunity to bring small lab equipment home with us as needed.
Stock based compensation may be the norm in Silicon Valley, but it isn't par for the course across different roles and industries. But the ~3% raise seems to be pervasive. This tells me that it doesn't have to do with stock based compensation.
~3% a year is a cost of living increase. If anyone gets 3% for a promotion they could ask where that number came from. If they recently got a 3% bump that means the promotion put them ahead by ~12 months of work at the company in the prior position. Does that make sense? If they haven't gotten a raise for close to a year, it means the promotion didn't really come with a pay bump at all if that's what they normally get.
Questioning these things when offered is probably the best way to get the employer to change them, or at a minimum it may make it clear what your future prospects at the company are.
I've only ever had it referred to as an annual merit increase, but it's definitely more aligned with the national cost of living.
Regardless of what it's called though, the question remains. Why does your value to other companies increase faster than your value to your own company? Presumably you're learning more about your company's business and your specific domain problems, which should make you more valuable to your company than it would to others. Is that assumption not valid?
> Why does your value to other companies increase faster than your value to your own company?
I think there's a lot that goes into this, which also shows how complex the topic is.
- There's your actual value and your perceived value
- When you're there and filling a niche, there may not really be a lack for a specific skill set which (might exist if you left) which there might be at the other company.
- Companies aren't always good and managing their desire to pay the least amount possible to retain an employee (natural, to keep costs down) with the employees willingness to leave, if they even have any inkling of the latter.
- An employees willingness to leave can have many inputs, some of them nothing to do with work, so it's hard to judge (e.g. lack of ability to work from home some days can go from a small annoyance to a reason to look for alternate employment depending on what else is going on in their life).
etc.
As to whether your skill should always be increased to the company you're at, I think that's generally true, but may not be in the specific instance. People get complacent, and sometimes the work environment can cause a excellent employee to perform in a mediocre manner, and vice versa.