Bring back Konqueror too while at it!

Edit: Apparently it still exists, it just isn’t the default on any mainstream distros anymore

Odoo actually. You more or less can’t use all the features, there’s too many. That doesn’t mean it’s the best ERP, it just tries to be a true generalist, which means it needs lots of customizations usually.

Yeah, the requirements should also be clear - or at least clear before any sort of implementation starts. Defining the requirements is a large part of what our consultants do and the more experienced ones know how to ask questions to get perspectives of people other than the “stars”. Takes months usually to get things to where us developers can get started on anything. We’ve built some hella cool shit for some customers but then you look at the git history and realize that it took the customer over a YEAR to go live. They must’ve easily invested six figures getting this ERP just right for their needs. Automatic imports from other software they use, lots of customizations, including some brand new in-erp apps. They’re loving it so far. But you don’t get this without considering a bunch of people’s needs.

at this point everyone knows

Yea I reckon most people don’t know. Terminally online people know. In your average household, Amazon is prolly considered trustworthy.

They’re common around designated nature trails in my country too. You’re just remembering simpler, happier times probably.

Something something when old men plant trees whose shade they knew they won’t sit in

Such a simple quote, yet so much wisdom.

It’s because you’re supposed to customize them, not use as-is. We’ve had a lot of happy customers. Some send us gifts! But for the first year or maybe even couple of years, you probably pay more to your partner for implementation, customizations and advice than to the ERP developer for licensing.

ERPs aren’t for every company, different ERPs work best for different companies and different partners themselves have their own specializations. The one I work through (used to work for, but now I have my own company and just contract for them), does small to medium sized production companies. Think 5-200 employees usually. The ERP we work with is meant to cover every imaginable use case - which is why it doesn’t have enough depth. We add a bunch of stuff that isn’t there OOTB, sometimes remove things in default modules, etc.

But first you NEED an ERP partner to make the most of it. At ours the CEO is also the biggest salesman. He’s not afraid to tell you if he doesn’t think it’s a good fit. A bad partner will still try to sell you and that’s going to end up in disappointment for everyone.

I picked the wrong week to quit methamphetamines.

Caffeine tablets it is then… Oh wait I bet those are going to be affected too. Fun times

Not for president Musk.

If he’s under investigation there, he’ll probably never visit Canada again.

It might also surprise you to learn that Dacia is actually a large French conglomerate.

They’ve been fully owned by Renault for more than two decades.

Punishing people by paying them for the time they spend commuting.

But it’s never that easy, is it? Capitalists are going to capitalist and that means you WILL be punished for the extra costs you incur to the company this way.

Maybe it’ll work for your factory, but in a big city where city center rent is already ridiculously high despite the significantly higher density than suburbs, you’ll just be unfairly punished for not paying twice as much rent if the company is allowed to discriminate. If they’re not allowed to discriminate, you can just spread out your commute even further in order to work less for the same money, so where’s the incentive in moving closer?

That’s because you have moronic zoning laws. The fix is to start by replacing those, not punishing people.

Something you might want to look into is the de minimis benefits in the Philippines. Employers can literally give their employees something like a rice subsidy tax free. It’s a poor country so their benefits are different from what we’d need in the west. And the de minimis are supposed to be really tiny benefits.

In Estonia, we have something called a personal car usage compensation. There’s a monthly limit in euros compensated per employee and a limit amount per kilometer as well. This year it was raised to max 550 EUR per month and 0.50 EUR per kilometer tax free. So you drive your personal car around for work for 100 kilometers, you get up to 50 euros (depends on employer). Significantly more than the fuel costs, but that’s how it’s supposed to be - cars also depreciate and need maintenance.

So what do I propose? A tax-free commute benefit. Limit the tax-free status to say 10 miles each way worth of benefit and (this is crucial) make it have rapidly diminishing returns. First mile is 10 dollars, second mile is 5 dollars, etc. Stop reducing it once you hit a dollar per mile. Now your commute time is worth money, but it’s worth more money if you live closer to work. Round up to the nearest whole mile too. Live 100 yards from work? Employer can pay you for a mile worth of commute tax-free. This is now the most efficient minute of your day with regards to earnings.

This structure incentivizes employers to pay it out as a benefit because it’s tax free so it’s more efficient than paying the same amount as wages plus adding it on top of your existing compensation package makes you more attractive as an employer. It doesn’t incentivize the employees to increase their commute length on purpose because the extra amount drops off so quickly plus it doesn’t incentivize employers to set limits on where they hire from or how the employees compute.

Drawback is that it doesn’t do a whole lot to address the density (lack of density) issue, but there are other solutions for that. Maybe sometimes two problems need two or even three or more solutions, rather than one single unifying solution that causes more problems than it solves.

I can live in any part of my country with what I’m paid, just as long as I don’t try to rent or buy a gigantic penthouse apartment or mansion. That’s while my wife stays home, too. No, I’m not super highly paid, I just live in a not particularly dense country and have a good career.

The world you’re proposing would not allow me such freedom. Like I said, if employers get to decide our commutes, the simple luxury of walking to and from work are gone because it’s an inefficient use of company time. I want this to be my time, not company time. Hell, managing my own time is why I started working B2B instead of full time so the commute doesn’t apply to me anymore, but if I ever have to work directly for someone else again, I’m not willing to let anyone tell me which neighborhood my family needs to move to in order for me to get the job, or how I must arrive at work.

I get that for you all that matters is borg-like efficiency, but some people value individual humans and their rights too.

If commutes are paid and people are free to choose where they live, you’re incentivizing LONGER commutes.

If commutes are paid and you need to incentivize shorter commutes, either the government or the employer is going to be able to tell you exactly where you’re allowed to live. And if you and your partner work far away from each other, you’ll just have to live in separate homes.

You’re already free to live closer to your job. I could live 150 meters from the office but choose not to because I want there to be greenery around my home. So I live 3 kilometers away and walk through a pretty nice part of town, including several parks.

You’re telling me you want a system where my employer can tell me to fuck off and drive to work or pay more rent to live in a worse apartment. It’d be prohibitively expensive to build a train line I could take to work. Buses are slower than driving.

Plus think about it. Downtown rent is already super high. If your location now determines which jobs you’re allowed to work, this gets worse.

There are much less draconian solutions for what you’re after. Here’s one I literally just came up with: Mandate new developments to have a minimum occupant density. Make it dependent on total population of the city. Include downtown office and shopping zones in this law, they also need to have a minimum population capacity so you’ll have a condo tower next to an office tower, or an office tower with apartments on some floors. Include a clause that old neighborhoods are to be demolished once they haven’t been compliant to the regulations for 5, maybe 10 years. By the time this happens to anyone, the land under the house will be worth way more than the house because it could house more units and once population is up, demand for real estate goes up too.

Or just have really high congestion charges and include suburbs for it. When nobody can afford to drive to work, apartments near jobs go up in demand and more get built. Demand for public transit goes up and ideally more gets built.

Must be OP trying to hide it, Toggl displayed it proudly. The author used to work for Toggl marketing and ask can be seen from this post, did an excellent job. He still has a webcomic, it’s just not marketing for Toggl anymore. Here it is

As for bias - it’s a time tracking tool, but I don’t think they actually shill for waterfall, I think it’s just poking fun at the agile methodologies.

Okay, so you’re for completely tearing up all rural communities and abolishing farms, I can dig that. What about people who get mental health issues from living in the concrete jungle though?

Then there’s people like me. I work as a software engineer, but can’t work at home for shit. Too many distractions. However, if I started commuting to work in this proposed system, my employer would have to pay me the same for fewer hours spent on the actual work, or pay more for the same amount of hours, just because it takes me half an hour to walk to work and half an hour to walk back home as I live pretty far from the city center. I imagine I’d be told to fuck off if I wanted to go to the office. Okay, technically all this no longer applies because I’m now working for myself at home (which has been a bit of a mistake), but it would have applied a few months ago.

Also what about factories and such? They often pollute, so it’s actually better if you have them a slight distance away from major population centers. But if they have to start paying for peoples’ commutes, you’d have to have them in-between apartment buildings to save money.

So you want the entire world to be forced to live in equivalents of Manhattan, or ideally, Kowloon Walled City?

Also, you say you’re against people driving to work, but the other potential consequence is that people in medium density cities are going to be told that they’re no longer allowed to walk to work.

Look, population density in general is good. Forcing it by telling employers they’re now both allowed AND encouraged to discriminate employees based on where they live is going to have so many unintended consequences there’s no point in even entertaining the thought. If they’re not allowed to discriminate, people are going to intentionally move far enough away to have a 4 hour commute each way.

There’s no winning here, the only way to make things better is to lobby for better zoning laws if you live in a country where those commonly prevent high-rises or mixed-use neighborhoods. That benefits everyone, regardless of whether they want to live in an apartment smaller than a standard shipping container, a luxury penthouse, or in the suburbs.

If you want maximum density, you need cities to be built from the ground up like they do in China. START with the skyscrapers, instead of building them when enough people live there for there to be demand.