|
Not all offices are non-essential:
- Laboratory equipment is not easily portable to home offices
- Servers (containing proprietary information) are stored on-site. Putting such stuff in the "cloud" would be a breach of security, and in some cases - a breach of contract or law.
- ...
I concede that almost all of the administrative work and some of the software development could be done away from the office. I suspect that part of the requirement for "work from office" is so those who are required to work from the office don't feel singled out.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel Pfeffer wrote: Personally, I find it easier to work in my office at work than at home. My co-workers, for the most part, disturb me less than my wife and kids, and the commute isn't too bad (~30 minutes each way).
+1. Only that for me the conmute is around 40 mins / way.
In addition, my work place is better equipped than my desk at home. (But it is going to change soon)
Daniel Pfeffer wrote: Even now, assuming that one isn't in one of the high-risk groups, one is expected to go into work twice or three times a week.
I find this mixed system the best, I am doing 2 days home and 3 days office. The only thing I would find even better is to have those 2 days together (thrusday and Friday) but that would mean too long wait time if something happens on wednesday where I have to be present to repair it (i.e. PLC in the field), that's why I am usually doing Monday+Thursday or Tuesday+Friday at home, in worst case it is a "Ok, I will take a look tomorrow" (next work day)
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
it sounds great. I work online mostly and new features seem to be quite useful
|
|
|
|
|
Yep. This is after Microsoft released two "studies" that said WFH is bad for employees and then followed that up with a WFH policy that basically mandated that employees go back into the office.
|
|
|
|
|
I work for a small company (currently 25 employees) and was hired after the COVID crisis. As soon as I could, I worked in the office, mostly bare (1 tech, 4 receptionists, another programmer hired the same day as I was and myself) and as safe as home. My fellow programmer caught COVID and was out for more than a month, but my wife works in a nursing home and my risk is roughly equal.
Beginning Monday, the new norm will become half the employees return to work Monday/Wednesday with the other half working Tuesday/Thursday. The office is packed with air purifiers, the front door is guarded by 2 infrared thermometers and masks are required if you leave your desk. Hand sanitizer bottles and soft wipes festoon every counter and the office now has a scheduled "deep clean" on a regular basis.
If you show high on an entry thermometer (100° F), an alarm goes off and you are required to immediately leave, return home, log in as sick and get tested. Failure to comply can result in immediate termination. Acrylic dividers separate people and a special key has been supplied for keying in entry codes, opening doors, etc. The shifts alternating days are in every other cube. All in all, every known precaution other than anti-covid architecture has been taken.
|
|
|
|
|
that will definitely lower the cost for the owner.
not just the bill for electricity, equipment, rent... also no more injury at work.
|
|
|
|
|
Sandeep Mewara wrote: I believe we all know that there would be a new norm post COVID.
I hope along with you that there will be a "post COVID".
Sandeep Mewara wrote: Microsoft already have shared they will allow WFH (no limit). What normal you think/forsee is going to be adopted as a base by most of the organizations?
Sounds like an ad.
Offices are specialized in making you work and supporting you to do so; home has distractions. You not as productive, and not as healthy. You need germs.
George Carlin - Germs, Immune System - YouTube[^]
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm being told I should get a flu shot. There is no "shot" for the virus. Do you think the virus will step aside while I go out and get my flu shot? I don't think so either; so I continue with the PPE, etc. .... sooooo, why the flu shot?
(Like taking an Aspirin when you're bleeding which is even worse than it sounds).
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it.
― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
|
|
|
|
|
It's a precaution, is all.
Yes, the Covid protection should mean that flu doesn't get a hold this year - but we've all seen how well they are working in England, France, ...
And the last thing health services need is a Covid outbreak alongside the usual pressures the flu puts on them over winter!
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
I had a similar query. Our organisation has asked us to reach to a doctor and get flu-shots!
Never had it any of the past years, should I this time? Probably I will pass. For now.
modified 14-Oct-20 14:52pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I've never gotten a flu shot. I may have had the flu a few years ago - not quite sure. My immune systems pretty serious. With COVID, that's not necessarily a good thing.
I've the same question - and in my case, due to a medication I take, I can not take "live vaccine" of any kind (or shouldn't). The flu shot's a 50/50 thing - that's the target as it's of necessity done by guess-work at what will be going around. The record's been pretty poor these last few years. The recommendation is that the flu shot will protect you and thus you'll not be confused between COVID and the flu. Statistically, not so much.
I'd definitely take the COVID vaccine . . . after it's been used a while on the general population. No different than I do with new versions of software and operating systems. Awaiting that first service pack. Fortunately, at least in my perception, the drug manufacturers are doing their due diligence and not trying to meet any political deadline. I hate putting this near-soapbox remark, but saying it would be ready just before the election, whether true or not, was one of the stupidest remarks that could possibly have been made - destroying trust, and rightly so.
Per the flu shot? I'm leaning towards it this time - but also because I'm getting up in years. Not yet decided.
Most PPE (masks) won't help much against the flu since it's mode of entry is via mucus membranes (eyes, nose, etc.) via surface-to-hand-to-face. Gloves would work - but only if you take them on and off, constantly, or can control yourself totally whilst out in the world. Having someone sneeze in your face won't do you any good, either.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos, GHB wrote: I'd definitely take the COVID vaccine . . . after it's been used a while
Can you get used vaccines on Craigslist? 
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos, GHB wrote: Most PPE (masks) won't help much against the flu since it's mode of entry is via mucus membranes
The main mode of infection for the flu is via droplets that you breathe. Just like for the Covid.
So yes, a properly used mask would reduce the risk of infection. Not eliminate it.
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
Never stop dreaming - Freddie Kruger
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are some distinctions that needs to be made here.
When Balboos mentions: W∴ Balboos, GHB wrote: Most PPE (masks) won't help much against the flu since it's mode of entry is via mucus membranes
I'm assuming PPE means "Personal protective equipment" which I also assume doesn't mean a piece of cloth or a surgical mask, but rather an N95 or better.
Also, they need to be worn properly, not with your nose sticking out above the mask as I can see way too often.
An N95 would help, if you can stand wearing it for a prolonged time. Also assuming you're wearing it properly without leakages.
A surgical mask, or a multi layer piece of cloth mask doesn't protect the bearer, but rather the people around the bearer.
A neck gaiter basically doesn't help at all.
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
Never stop dreaming - Freddie Kruger
|
|
|
|
|
everyone here in America has to wear a mask, some states it is now a law.
if everyone is wearing masks, then how can we have covid spikes again in 5 major US states, more to be added I am sure in the next week?
Masks are not preventing covid, that's why, not even slowing it down.
covid can live on amazon delivery boxes for days, mask or no mask. pikup box, rub eyes, now you have covid.
|
|
|
|
|
Could you explain where in that linked article it stated that '85% of people who had COVID, were wearing their mask all the time'? Or if that is your interpretation, how you came to that conclusion?
I can see nothing in that article that supports your statement. I'm happy to accept that I may have missed something though.
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
My mistake, not 85%, but 74%
-- page 2 - 71% of case-patients and 74% of controlparticipants reported always using cloth face coverings or other
mask types when in public.
-- page 4 - table - "Always"
The news article reported 85% (71% always wears mask, and 14% sometimes/occasional wears mask), but I could not find the 14% that occasionally wore a mask in the CDC report.
My conclusion to this is that it is not conclusive by any stretch of the imagination that wearing masks stops people from getting sick, and this CDC study proves that.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you. I believe the actual figure is 70.6 for case patients; the 74.2 number is for the control group (symptomatic patients who tested negative). Whatever though, 70.6 is a big number, and 3.6% difference doesn't fill me with confidence!
Also of interest to me:
- 40.9% of case patients had visited a restaurant, where they would have to remove their mask (compared to 27.7% of the control group).
- 50.8% of case patients had a family member with known Covid-19
There's no way of knowing one way or another from the data, but is it possible that half the people caught Covid-19 in their own home (where they wouldn't wear a mask) and most of the rest caught it in a restaurant or bar, where they have to take their mask off to eat/drink?
Also of note:
- The mask-wearing figures are based on self-report, which is often unreliable (people forget things and sometimes fib).
- A single study doesn't constitute proof in itself, of course. I'd like to see a systematic review or meta analysis, and I'd like to see studies with larger sample sizes.
- I'm a professional software developers and this is not software development, so I don't have the background to interpret the results properly.
Having said all that, it is interesting data, thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
It is interesting to note that as of this week here in the States, we are having massive covid spikes again; at least 5 States that I have read, possibly more. All States that mandate wearing a mask.
I don't think there is a State that has wearing a mask be optional.
So, how can we be having COVID spikes again, if everyone is wearing their masks? and in Europe too: European Countries See Spikes In Coronavirus Cases : NPR[^]
I wear a mask because I am told too. I would NOT wear a mask if it was my option.
|
|
|
|
|
Who knows. Maybe they are a complete waste of time. Maybe things would be even worse without them.
This seems to be becoming a minority view these days, but I'm just going to trust the expert advice. It may turn out to be wrong/ politically motivated or whatever, but it doesn't seem too much of a sacrifice to me.
It's not all bad. The other day I had a big spot on my chin, and the mask covered it up nicely.
|
|
|
|
|
It's not that the mask protects the wearer so much as that it protects everybody else. ( From those that don't know that they are carrying.) So wear the damned thing to protect your Grandma ( or, in my case, grandniece... )
|
|
|
|
|
Well a look around the web and (1) many sites cite your statement so it is true - and also the contact, as well.
Various comments went from ignoring the contact method (which even recently was touted as important on media) through 'some thing it may be spread as an aerosol' as an alternative to the contact methods and finally some ignore the contact methods altogether.
Well - by even simple logic, a moist sneeze would spread the flu. Just breath in through your nose, and of course, settling on your eyes. In that way I absolutely stand corrected.
What bothers me about the whole thing is that there's far too much "flexibility" in reporting.
Eg: some months ago it was noted that persons with blood type A are more likely to get a severe case of COVID - and then that sort of disappeared. Last night, however, the report noted that those with blood type O are less likely to have a severe reaction and that (in the US) type A is the second most prevalent blood type. As seen in the US, government controlled organizations run by appointees can modify reality to suit the need of those who appointed them, so
common sense puts your post as valid but the recent state of affairs and variations in the attribution lead me to think that it's being changed. Hopefully, math, chemistry, and physics will not fall pray to this feeling that appeasement is a valid data point in a study.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
I don't see how it can have anything to do with Covid, whether or not someone has an immune reaction to someone elses red bloodcells.
There must be a thousands of other immune reactions that has more impact than that.
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
Never stop dreaming - Freddie Kruger
|
|
|
|
|
As I recall, it was hypothesized that the antibodies in non-A blood recognized the COVID virus and attacked it.
I didn't hear any hypothesis about why the O group do better. Remember, there's always a possibility of an accidental immune response (or lack of one).
As I recall, barely, people who descended from survivors of the Black Plague had a high resistance to HIV/Aids.[^]
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
