Bill Gates predicts our work meetings will move to metaverse in 2-3 years

Youn

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jan 22, 2007
Messages
5,942
my company still groans when I bring up simple agile/scrum/kanban type stuff, no way they'll agree to go VR in 2-3 years. we are all working from home though, and only a few older people seem upset about it because they "miss everyone so much uwu"
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
34,284
The main problem may be that the manager originally got their job to be a glorified taskmaster and upper level management spy with a directive to periodically look over your shoulder, and make pointless reports related to things like "on task time" and "gets-along/doesn't-get-along with others" rather than measuring worker output in terms of actual delivered results, which can be especially difficult in some fields where bad workers can churn out a ton of output which never actually contributes anything. If you're not in a cubicle somewhere that the manager can walk around and verify you appear to be doing X instead of any other Y then what is the point of that manager?

Put another way, it's very difficult to get someone to understand the advantages of something, when that something also stands in direct opposition to their ability to keep making money.


That sounds awfully cynical to me.

I think the resistance to the work from home movement has more to do with the fact that management makes decisions, and people who get promoted to management roles are tend on average to be more likely to be "people person's", so when they go on to make decisions for their company, they lack any perspective other than their own, which is that facetime is very important to productivity, which it isn't. It is the opposite. Facetime detracts from productivity and wastes time.
 

Spun Ducky

Gawd
Joined
Feb 1, 2009
Messages
708
The biggest gripe I have had from coworkers and friends is WFH is better in everyway except they get more work done. Also can't forget about banging the secretaries as that would surely be less fun in the metaverse. I think the future is flex for positions that have on site responsibilities and remote for the rest. I don't see the current VR headsets pulling things into a "metaverse" outside of just annoying people.
 

Burticus

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Messages
4,651
my company still groans when I bring up simple agile/scrum/kanban type stuff, no way they'll agree to go VR in 2-3 years. we are all working from home though, and only a few older people seem upset about it because they "miss everyone so much uwu"

As someone who has a daily 8am scrum and kanban sprint project review (EVERY F*CKING DAY) ..... the only difference now is we do it from home instead of from a conference room at the office. With people jammed in a small room coughing and wheezing all over each over. *shudders*

I do sort of miss the comraderies if you are lucky enough to have coworkers you like. I used to, but eventually everyone leaves and you're left with the rest.

Some people see value in a physical presence in the office just so they can randomly walk by and drop unwanted work in your lap. If I'm remote, I'm busy. I'm in a meeting. I'm in the middle of a project. No time to chat. If it's important, send me an email or put in a change ticket. It's shocking how well this works.

I mean honestly if you walked through our building circa 2019 all you see is people wearing headphones all day anyway. They don't want to chit chat. Sometimes people just wear the headsets to look busy so people won't talk to them (I am guilty of this).
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
34,284
As someone who has a daily 8am scrum and kanban sprint project review (EVERY F*CKING DAY) ..... the only difference now is we do it from home instead of from a conference room at the office. With people jammed in a small room coughing and wheezing all over each over. *shudders*

I do sort of miss the comraderies if you are lucky enough to have coworkers you like. I used to, but eventually everyone leaves and you're left with the rest.

Some people see value in a physical presence in the office just so they can randomly walk by and drop unwanted work in your lap. If I'm remote, I'm busy. I'm in a meeting. I'm in the middle of a project. No time to chat. If it's important, send me an email or put in a change ticket. It's shocking how well this works.

I mean honestly if you walked through our building circa 2019 all you see is people wearing headphones all day anyway. They don't want to chit chat. Sometimes people just wear the headsets to look busy so people won't talk to them (I am guilty of this).

That sounds rough. The only time I have had daily stand up meetings or whatever the cool thing to call them these days is, since transitioning to product development, they were at 10am, to account for "R&D hours".

Manufacturing is brutal though. Everyone always wants to get started at 6am, and it really gets tiring when you are not a natural morning person.

I walk around in a fog most mornings. My brain doesn't even start firing on all cylinders until after 2pm most days, and I am at my most productive and creative between 8pm and 2am.
 

IndyColtsFan

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 4, 2017
Messages
491
Seriously though, I don't get all this fascination with video. A speakerphone is fine. Wasted bandwidth and resources.

It’s really stupid. On interviews at my level, it is generally expected to have your camera on; I rolled my eyes at the guy earlier in the thread who said he wouldn’t hire a guy who turned his camera on in an interview. However, I never turn it on at work for meetings. We had a client kickoff meeting a few weeks ago and this asshat client PM actually said “It’s our culture to turn on our cameras, so we’d like to see your shining faces too.” None of us turned on our cameras. Lol.

And yeah, Bill Gates is just trying to sell more shit. VR meetings are completely stupid and a waste outside of a few extreme edge cases. Otherwise, it’s stupid but you know the ”hip” companies will embrace it.
 

IndyColtsFan

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 4, 2017
Messages
491
As someone who has a daily 8am scrum and kanban sprint project review (EVERY F*CKING DAY) ..... the only difference now is we do it from home instead of from a conference room at the office. With people jammed in a small room coughing and wheezing all over each over. *shudders*

I do sort of miss the comraderies if you are lucky enough to have coworkers you like. I used to, but eventually everyone leaves and you're left with the rest.

Some people see value in a physical presence in the office just so they can randomly walk by and drop unwanted work in your lap. If I'm remote, I'm busy. I'm in a meeting. I'm in the middle of a project. No time to chat. If it's important, send me an email or put in a change ticket. It's shocking how well this works.

I mean honestly if you walked through our building circa 2019 all you see is people wearing headphones all day anyway. They don't want to chit chat. Sometimes people just wear the headsets to look busy so people won't talk to them (I am guilty of this).

When I last worked in an office with an “open” plan, I always had my AirPods in. Sometimes I put them in even if the batteries were dead just so people would leave me alone. :
 

sadsteve

Gawd
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
608
This is far worse than the dystopias that Phillip K Dick ever imagined. The whole thing is pointless and just stressing everyone out.

If I'm doing a job, give me the design documents, give me a deadline. I either completed the assignment, to the specifications, on time, or I did not. Why does it matter if I did the whole thing in 1 hour, if it works perfectly?
Before I retired at the end of 2019, that's the way it worked for me. My boss didn't care if I worked from home or at work. As long as I met the deadline all was good. I mostly went to work to avoid the distractions at home! :)
 

cybereality

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
8,789
Yeah, I spent a lot of time freelancing from home for most of my career, and it was so much better. I would get a contract, with a deadline, and I got to choose how I spent my time as long as I delivered on the deadline I got paid.

So I could work a few hours here and there every day, take a few days off at my leisure. Or play counter strike for a month and then pull a crazy 48 hour all nighter and get the whole thing done (I was young and stupid, can't do this kind of thing now).
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
34,284
There is a lot of projection in this post, and maybe your colleague traumatized you.

If you are not comfortable being seen, then YOU have problems, and frankly that is a HUGE red flag for any job that isn't socially isolated. I happen to need people that are confident enough to not be rattled by something as simple as showing their face.

As for what people are saying, you clearly do not work anywhere near the sales side of any industry, because sales people will say anything to make a sale and body language is far more important in those conversations than what the person is saying, though it is 100% possible to both listen to what someone is saying and observe their behavior.

Yes, I ask, and yes, if I am interviewing you lets say, and I say 'hey could you turn your camera on' and you refuse, yep we are done.

I also happen to work with a lot of legal and para-legal professions, in some fairly tense situations (million+ dollars on the line) and yes, I want people to use their cameras, it keeps people honest, it also keeps people more civil and helps when you have a room full of people trying to talk. You know all those handy visual cues that someone is done talking, or that someone else is about to speak, super flipping helpful. Hell this applies to any and all video conferences where it isn't just one talking head dictating for an hour, if there is a conversation to be had between multiple people, I expect you to have your camera on.

By the way, I also have my camera on, so feel free to observe me and put me under your microscope of wannabe intimidation.

And yes, I realize it isn't always practical so there is wiggle room.

It's a matter of priorities more than comfort.

Seeing video feeds of colleagues and having them see a video feed of you is a complete and total waste.

A waste of time (having to get ready for work, dress professionally, make sure your background looks presentable, etc.) a waste of screen real estate (now there are boxes taking up space of my screen with ugly mugs I don't want to see) a waste of bandwidth, and a waste of resources buying cameras and other shit to make this work.

It literally negates a large portion of the benefits of being able to work remotely, and is a total productivity killer.

Seeing the face of colleagues is simply completely and totally unnecessary to do almost any job (unless that job involves the face you are looking at). It angers me to waste my time on something so trivial and useless. I want to get down to brass tacks, and not deal with peoples stupid faces.

Screen shares are the holy grail. Everything and anything on top of that other than traditional voice based conferencing is just stupidity.

We are not here to hold hands and sing kumbah yah together. We are here to get shit done, and seeing colleagues faces does not aid in getting shit done in any way, shape or form, and detracts from it in many ways.
 

cybereality

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
8,789
I mean, the whole thing is a waste of time. There have been numerous studies, especially regarding remote work and pandemic, and the majority of office time is wasted on pointless meetings, fooling around with coworkers, or wasting time on the internet.

This article, for example, claims only 25% of time workers in info/tech fields are actually going to real work (for example programmers programming, etc.). The rest is wasted on collaboration, much of which is not needed or at least not necessary to be 2 hour meetings with 30 people.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/harmon...he-time-to-stop-wasting-time/?sh=45e7d06034dd

We need *less* meetings, not more video conferencing or VR or whatever, that will just kill productivity while making everyone uncomfortable. It's just dumb. All the data is out there and easy to find, but none of this is based on actual studies. It's technology for the sake of it, when it's making everyone's lives worse.
 

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
12,884
There is a lot of projection in this post, and maybe your colleague traumatized you.
I don't know which part of that would be projection? That I don't want / need to see their faces to discuss something?
As for the colleague, he did not hire me, I was at the company long before him, and was there long after he was let go.
If you are not comfortable being seen, then YOU have problems,
I said I don't want to see my partners while talking about work. But sure, completely misconsctrue it. Maybe you think that everybody is out to fool you. And you need to watch them like a hawk.
We completed many projects last year with remote partners without ever seeing their faces on camera. I needed to see their computer screen not their face to understand the issues.
and frankly that is a HUGE red flag for any job that isn't socially isolated. I happen to need people that are confident enough to not be rattled by something as simple as showing their face.
You seem to be fixated on this. I'm sure that peoples features and face change a lot between the day I'm in the office and when I'm working from home, that we need to see each other on camera LOL.
As for what people are saying, you clearly do not work anywhere near the sales side of any industry, because sales people will say anything to make a sale and body language is far more important in those conversations than what the person is saying, though it is 100% possible to both listen to what someone is saying and observe their behavior.
So I see, I don't go around assuming that my colleagues are going to lie to me. Anyone who says A when B is true should be let go.
Yes, I ask, and yes, if I am interviewing you lets say, and I say 'hey could you turn your camera on' and you refuse, yep we are done.
That's entirely different, you made it sound like if they don't have their camera already on when you start you dismiss them immediately.
I also happen to work with a lot of legal and para-legal professions, in some fairly tense situations (million+ dollars on the line) and yes, I want people to use their cameras, it keeps people honest, it also keeps people more civil and helps when you have a room full of people trying to talk. You know all those handy visual cues that someone is done talking, or that someone else is about to speak, super flipping helpful. Hell this applies to any and all video conferences where it isn't just one talking head dictating for an hour, if there is a conversation to be had between multiple people, I expect you to have your camera on.
Now you are just moving the goalposts, yes there are certain official situations where having a camera on is a form of courtesy, but a run of the mill work related meeting hardly qualifies.
But even with external partners I leave it to their discretion, if they have their camera on I'll turn on mine. If they don't then I won't and won't insist that we use them.
By the way, I also have my camera on, so feel free to observe me and put me under your microscope of wannabe intimidation.
Yes, the old fallacy, people with nothing to hide should not be afraid.
 
Last edited:

TheOne&OnlyZeke

100% Irish
Joined
Jul 21, 2000
Messages
11,011
I don't mind online meetings, but fuck having cameras on
Our head of department tried to make everyone have their cameras on for meetings. it lasted about 3 meetings, before it faded again.
No need for it.

As for this stuff....nnoooooooo waaayyyyyy
 

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
32,453
my company still groans when I bring up simple agile/scrum/kanban type stuff, no way they'll agree to go VR in 2-3 years. we are all working from home though, and only a few older people seem upset about it because they "miss everyone so much uwu"
Ah, the management buzzwords. Hearing them is akin to somebody pontificating about the "cloud."
 

Aireoth

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
5,934
I don't know which part of that would be projection? That I don't want / need to see their faces to discuss something?
As for the colleague, he did not hire me, I was at the company long before him, and was there long after he was let go.

I said I don't want to see my partners while talking about work. But sure, completely misconsctrue it. Maybe you think that everybody is out to fool you. And you need to watch them like a hawk.
We completed many projects last year with remote partners without ever seeing their faces on camera. I needed to see their computer screen not their face to understand the issues.

You seem to be fixated on this. I'm sure that peoples features and face change a lot between the day I'm in the office and when I'm working from home, that we need to see each other on camera LOL.

So I see, I don't go around assuming that my colleagues are going to lie to me. Anyone who says A when B is true should be let go.

That's entirely different, you made it sound like if they don't have their camera already on when you start you dismiss them immediately.

Now you are just moving the goalposts, yes there are certain official situations where having a camera on is a form of courtesy, but a run of the mill work related meeting hardly qualifies.
But even with external partners I leave it to their discretion, if they have their camera on I'll turn on mine. If they don't then I won't and won't insist that we use them.

Yes, the old fallacy, people with nothing to hide should not be afraid.
You are the one that walked in making a bunch of assumptions, and offended that my dislike is somehow translates to more than that.
 

cybereality

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
8,789
my company still groans when I bring up simple agile/scrum/kanban type stuff, no way they'll agree to go VR in 2-3 years. we are all working from home though, and only a few older people seem upset about it because they "miss everyone so much uwu"
Correct. There are decades of research proving agile works, increases productivity and reduces cost and risk. And there are also studies showing that useless collaboration (not scrum, that actually works) is reducing productivity, and thus increasing cost and time to completion.

But these people like Bill are not looking at the actual data to make people's lives better. They are jumping on the latest buzzword they probably poorly understand, to get hits (and it works, we're talking about it) rather than solving real problems.
 

Eulogy

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
2,674
Correct. There are decades of research proving agile works, increases productivity and reduces cost and risk. And there are also studies showing that useless collaboration (not scrum, that actually works) is reducing productivity, and thus increasing cost and time to completion.
What are you calling "useless collaboration" here?
 

cybereality

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
8,789
What are you calling "useless collaboration" here?
So, imagine (this is not totally uncommon) you have a 45 minute video conference with 15 people, but it's primarily 1 person talking the whole time.

If me (or the other 13 people) are not giving feedback, then our presence is useless. We are not adding anything by being there. But you wasted 45 minutes of my time (or over 10 hours collectively of billable time), and even more that is needed to recall what I was doing to get back and do my actual job.

So this 45 minute meeting, could have rather been a well written email, or a PDF, an animated presentation. Most stuff can be more accurately and concisely described with text and diagrams, way better than talking on a video live.

Agile and scrum are different because everyone is involved in the development (for example, in a stand up, everyone gets the same amount of time to talk and everyone is required to talk and answer a few key questions and not mess around). So this kind of collaboration is very useful and necessary.
 

The Mad Atheist

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 9, 2018
Messages
1,417
Would we be required to wear a mask because someone might be triggered when they see someone without one!?
And yes, I know it was fake.
 

ElementDave

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 5, 2013
Messages
343
Bill is going to have to provide workers with a map to the metaverse, complete with driving instructions. Maybe explain its relation to the cloud, too.
If you have something worth saying, just write it, I can read. Also, can't stand all those dudes on YouTube with their gaping mouth and wide eyes on the thumbnail. The internet has gone to shit.
(y)
Fuck the neurotoxic abomination known as YouTube. In exchange for being spared from thirty seconds of text, one is expected to sit through a torturous thirty-minute video presentation delivered by a drooling idiot. Videos can be an effective aid in presentation, but now they're used everywhere and for content in which the medium makes no sense at all. Bring back Usenet.
 
Last edited:

cybereality

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
8,789
(y)Fuck the neurotoxic abomination known as YouTube. In exchange for being spared from thirty seconds of text, one is expected to sit through a torturous thirty-minute video presentation delivered by a drooling idiot. Videos can be an effective aid in presentation, but now they're used everywhere and for content in which the medium makes no sense at all. Bring back Usenet.
Basically, yes. I've seen videos that were 10 minutes long to explain where to find a button in the Windows UI, something they said for 15 seconds at the end of the video.

There are videos that are 30 minutes long that teach you nothing, while also not having quality photography or cinematics. There is good stuff on YouTube, and I watch a lot, but most of it is crap (I guess the same can be said for books, movies, or any previous medium).
 

staknhalo

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
2,320
Basically, yes. I've seen videos that were 10 minutes long to explain where to find a button in the Windows UI, something they said for 15 seconds at the end of the video.

There are videos that are 30 minutes long that teach you nothing, while also not having quality photography or cinematics. There is good stuff on YouTube, and I watch a lot, but most of it is crap (I guess the same can be said for books, movies, or any previous medium).

And now they removed the dislike count so that you can't distinguish helpful videos from bullshit spam videos at a glance 👍
 

Zarathustra[H]

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
34,284
Fuck the neurotoxic abomination known as YouTube. In exchange for being spared from thirty seconds of text, one is expected to sit through a torturous thirty-minute video presentation delivered by a drooling idiot. Videos can be an effective aid in presentation, but now they're used everywhere and for content in which the medium makes no sense at all. Bring back Usenet.

Couldn't agree more, though I think I prefer a web forum (like this one) to usenet. I never really got into it back in the day.

The reason for it is simple though. All the ad money is in video. It's harder and harder for written content creators to survive. So instead we get morons who barely know what they are talking about creating videos where they display charts and graphs in their video instead of good written content with embedded images.

The internet peaked in 2007. It's been all downhill since.
 

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
12,884
And now they removed the dislike count so that you can't distinguish helpful videos from bullshit spam videos at a glance 👍
There is an extension for that, although IDK how effective. Or maybe youtube is embezzling dislikes now.
 

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
12,884
Basically, yes. I've seen videos that were 10 minutes long to explain where to find a button in the Windows UI, something they said for 15 seconds at the end of the video.

There are videos that are 30 minutes long that teach you nothing, while also not having quality photography or cinematics. There is good stuff on YouTube, and I watch a lot, but most of it is crap (I guess the same can be said for books, movies, or any previous medium).
Those videos are an automatic dislike from me, if I don't outright report them for misleading content.
90% of youtube is ignoramuses talking about articles others have written.
 

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
12,647
Couldn't agree more, though I think I prefer a web forum (like this one) to usenet. I never really got into it back in the day.

The reason for it is simple though. All the ad money is in video. It's harder and harder for written content creators to survive. So instead we get morons who barely know what they are talking about creating videos where they display charts and graphs in their video instead of good written content with embedded images.

The internet peaked in 2007. It's been all downhill since.

This is why I choose to watch a number of different channels, probably about 200 or so on my list, and that is about it. It is like reddit, I focus on about 40 or so sub reddits and that is it.
 

SonDa5

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 20, 2008
Messages
7,430
Integrate neuropixel brain sensors to user harnes/mask for brain mirroring AI clone/machine and your cloned/back up AI tweaked brain can sit in for you when you are sick.....
 

ElementDave

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 5, 2013
Messages
343
Couldn't agree more, though I think I prefer a web forum (like this one) to usenet. I never really got into it back in the day.
Yeah, Usenet had to die. It was a magnet for trolls and spammers, and only seems great in retrospect when compared to the likes of Twitter and similar crimes against humanity. The archives are of value though, but Google made it impossible to efficiently search them for reasons I can only assume relate to lack of advertising potential.

Most of the web forums in which I've participated over the years are now dead. I sure [h]ope that this one doesn't share a similar fate.
 
Last edited:

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
32,453
Yeah, Usenet had to die. It was a magnet for trolls and spammers, and only seems great in retrospect when compared to the likes of Twitter and similar crimes against humanity. The archives are of value though, but Google made it impossible to efficiently search them for reasons I can only assume relate to lack of advertising potential.

Most of the web forums in which I've participated over the years are now dead. I sure [h]ope that this one doesn't share a similar fate.
Reddit and Facebook have murdered the internet.
 

whateverer

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 2, 2016
Messages
1,669
Like most things "internet", if it gets used for porn successfully then it will be successful overall.




It already is.

The problem is that while Live Camgirls aare popular, there's no demand for you to show them your face while you get off.

Only Paid Visual Content Producers feel it's necessary to be seen (this includes Camgirls, actors, and advertisers, just to throw a few more examples into the pie) - everyone else holding Zoom Meetings for work can get by a whole lot easier with the camera off.
 

staknhalo

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
2,320
Reddit and Facebook have murdered the internet.

Easily and readily available literal snuff porn etc too, people weren't meant to accept and/or indulge in some things enmasse. Has an effect on the larger picture IMO. All the 'degeneracy' such as narcissism, said snuff porn, etc. It's all linked.
 

ElementDave

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 5, 2013
Messages
343
Reddit and Facebook have murdered the internet.
They belong to the "similar" group in "Twitter and similar..." from my post. The complete list of group members would exceed the length limit of forum posts, but if I were to arrange just these three in order from "best" to worst, the list would probably read: Reddit, Twitter, and Facebook.
 
Last edited:

cybereality

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
8,789
Doesn't matter. Keep smashing that dislike button. Removing the count was a psychological gambit to try and get people to stop pressing the button.
It does still affect the search algorithm. Eveverything is the same, except you don't see the number publicly (creators can still see).
 

MrGuvernment

Fully [H]
Joined
Aug 3, 2004
Messages
20,618
It’s really stupid. On interviews at my level, it is generally expected to have your camera on; I rolled my eyes at the guy earlier in the thread who said he wouldn’t hire a guy who turned his camera on in an interview. However, I never turn it on at work for meetings. We had a client kickoff meeting a few weeks ago and this asshat client PM actually said “It’s our culture to turn on our cameras, so we’d like to see your shining faces too.” None of us turned on our cameras. Lol.

And yeah, Bill Gates is just trying to sell more shit. VR meetings are completely stupid and a waste outside of a few extreme edge cases. Otherwise, it’s stupid but you know the ”hip” companies will embrace it.
Video burn out, people are all sick of having to be on camera so to try and force people is stupid. Luckiy my company told everyone, do not feel bad if you do not want to have your video on, as many people are in many meetings through the day and you can get "video exhaustion"
 
Top