• 105 Posts
  • 3.85K Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: October 4th, 2023

help-circle



  • kagis

    It sounds like he would have the authority to require in-office work.

    https://www.opm.gov/frequently-asked-questions/telework-faq/remote-work/

    Does an employee have a right to engage in remote work?

    No. Remote work is not a universal employee benefit or an employee right.

    Can a manager deny a request for remote work?

    Yes. Because of the policy and potential costs implications of remote work arrangements, agencies should evaluate and consider such requests (especially those submitted primarily for the convenience of the employee), on a case-by-case basis, highlighting the cost effectiveness and business benefits to the agency or organization.

    Can a manager terminate an existing remote work arrangement?

    Yes. An agency may determine that a remote work arrangement no longer meets the business needs of the organization or that the arrangement negatively impacts the employee’s performance. However, terminating a remote work arrangement, particularly if the employee resides outside the local commuting area of the agency worksite, may require additional considerations. If the decision is made to terminate the remote work arrangement for business reasons, there may be costs implications for the agency to consider.

    That being said, my guess is that at least some federal employees probably pretty much have to work outside of the office, just because of the nature of the job – like, it may be travel-intensive. I guess they could end work-from-home stuff.


  • If you’re interested in home automation, I think that there’s a reasonable argument for running it on separate hardware. Not much by way of hardware requirements, but you don’t want to take it down, especially if it’s doing things like lighting control.

    Same sort of idea for some data-logging systems, like weather stations or ADS-B receivers.

    Other than that, though, I’d probably avoid running an extra system just because I have hardware. More power usage, heat, and maintenance.

    EDIT: Maybe hook it up to a power management device, if you don’t have that set up, so that you can power-cycle your other hardware remotely.


  • I mean, some of those EOLed nearly a decade ago.

    You can argue over what a reasonable EOL is, but all hardware is going to EOL at some point, and at that point, it isn’t going to keep getting updates.

    Throw enough money at a vendor, and I’m sure that you can get extended support contracts that will keep it going for however long people are willing to keep chucking money at a vendor – some businesses pay for support on truly ancient hardware – but this is a consumer broadband router. It’s unlikely to make a lot of sense to do so on this – the hardware isn’t worth much, nor is it going to be terribly expensive to replace, and especially if you’re using the wireless functionality, you probably want support for newer WiFi standards anyway that updated hardware will bring.

    I do think that there’s maybe a good argument that EOLing hardware should be handled in a better way. Like, maybe hardware should ship with an EOL sticker, so that someone can glance at hardware and see if it’s “expired”. Or maybe network hardware should have some sort of way of reporting EOL in response to a network query, so that someone can audit a network for EOLed hardware.

    But EOLing hardware is gonna happen.




  • The Bible wasn’t encouraging it, just saying that it happened.

    Genesis 19:30-38:

    Lot and His Daughters

    30 Lot and his two daughters left Zoar and settled in the mountains, for he was afraid to stay in Zoar. He and his two daughters lived in a cave. 31 One day the older daughter said to the younger, “Our father is old, and there is no man around here to give us children—as is the custom all over the earth. 32 Let’s get our father to drink wine and then sleep with him and preserve our family line through our father.”

    33 That night they got their father to drink wine, and the older daughter went in and slept with him. He was not aware of it when she lay down or when she got up.

    34 The next day the older daughter said to the younger, “Last night I slept with my father. Let’s get him to drink wine again tonight, and you go in and sleep with him so we can preserve our family line through our father.” 35 So they got their father to drink wine that night also, and the younger daughter went in and slept with him. Again he was not aware of it when she lay down or when she got up.

    36 So both of Lot’s daughters became pregnant by their father. 37 The older daughter had a son, and she named him Moab[a]; he is the father of the Moabites of today. 38 The younger daughter also had a son, and she named him Ben-Ammi[b]; he is the father of the Ammonites[c] of today.

    EDIT: I’d also add that it looks like the Ammonites and the Moabites were enemies of the Israelites. Probably research material out there on this, but I imagine that this is sort of politically badmouthing the enemy.








  • “There will essentially be nothing left of America, which is trying to drag us into escalation. There will be no Biden or Trump. America is being inflicted with 95 percent total damage,” said Andrei Gurulev, a State Duma deputy, speaking on Sunday Evening with Vladimir Solovyov, broadcast by state-owned station Russia-1.

    95% sounds like a lot. Not sure how he’s measuring, though.

    “Today, we are quite ready to destroy the entire nuclear potential of England and France with a single strike. This will be one of the options for deterring the United States from striking Russia,” the former tank commander added.

    Firstly, I’m skeptical that Russia has the ability to reliably locate both the British and French subs at sea.

    Secondly, I’d say that as plans to get the US to not escalate with Russia go, a preemptive nuclear strike against the UK and France probably is going to be pretty counterproductive.





  • Robert E. Lee’s “excellent abilities” as general of the Confederate Army

    Lee did do very well. Civil War history isn’t specifically my area of interest, but I don’t think that there’s another high-ranking commander who one could reasonably say used his forces more effectively in the war. He had a heavily-winning record while fighting larger forces that were better-equipped.

    He was also highly-regarded in his time; he was offered command of the Union Army, and commanded the most-important Confederate military formation for much of the war.