As someone who has been alone in some deeply dark places, I'll share what's worked for me - YMMV.
* You gotta force yourself out. There's no trick, you just gotta fuckin' do it. It's hard. It sucks. You've also gotta do it if only to make sure you're varying your day and creating the opportunity for chance encounters. I spent fifteen months bottled up alone and it was only through the good graces of friends that I didn't...yeah.
* Eat out more, specifically for the human interaction. Find a local restaurant with a good deal on food (like a happy hour), and head there once a week for a meal you didn't make, and to be surrounded by strangers. Even just a "Yes Sir/Ma'am" and similar pleasantries will help, weirdly enough, because it's direct human contact. If there's a trivia night, even better - Buffalo Wild Wings was my brief go-to for that sort of thing.
* You gotta learn to love yourself, somehow. If there's an aspect you don't like, set about fixing it. For me, it was weight and my soft skills, so I worked on both in the time I could with the energy I had. Being alone means if you don't like yourself, you're never going to be in good spirits.
* You're also not really alone, depending on perspective. Setup a bird feeder and just sit and watch it. Talk to the wildlife, silly as that sounds. Your pets help, but they're "at home", while the rest of the world is decidedly not "at home". You gotta get out of the home if you don't want to be alone.
* You mentioned playing games, and I'll add that's actually what kept me sane during those fifteen months of solo unemployment. I joined a multiplayer game server community, worked my way into administration, made friends, ran events. Gaming can be a form of community if it's intentional, i.e. not just joining random lobbies to kill time.
Look, as someone still single at 39 (but blessedly living with my best friends), being alone sucks ass. There's no way around that, even for someone who generally enjoys their solitude. Lacking the warmth and intimacy of another person is debilitating in a way nothing else is, at least to me, but friends do help in their own way. We cook for each other, share our days, treat one another when we're dour, and do what we can to lift others up. So maybe I'm suggesting you reach out to other friends you may have in similar boats, see if they'd like to spend more time together.
Beyond that, some life lessons I've learned since I had more folks come into my life, that I use when I'm feeling alone or lonely again:
* Go to a city at night, downtown ideally. I look around at the empty buildings, the changing lights, the abandoned sidewalks. I remind myself I'm one of eight and a half billion people, on a single planet in a vast galaxy, itself a small part of an immense universe. Weirdly enough, the smallness of being helps me feel less alone, knowing how lucky I am to be amidst all this, right now.
* After the above, I grab a burger and a milkshake, because I deserve it.
* Pop in some earbuds, go outside for a walk, and dance. Fuck the onlookers, just exist for a moment outside your home. Prove to everyone else you're still here.
* VRChat has been damn helpful. Pop on my headset, drop into an avatar that reflects me in the moment, and world hop. Nobody judges what you do in VR, provided you're not breaking instance rules, and there's so many people there to hang out with, all while staying home. It legit got me through COVID.
* Run a game night! Gathering around Jackbox from every corner of the globe for an hour or two of weekly shitposting also got us all through COVID. Just make sure to all be in voice chat or video conferencing to rib one another.
As tired and cliche as this is, the last point I'll say is that this is exactly what the prior phase of your life was: a chapter. Chapters have endings, and this one is no different. Prepare for the long haul, but hopefully you find someone - and something - better, sooner. You're not alone in being alone, but you'll remain alone only as long as you choose to be alone.
Get out there. Force social interactions. Build those muscles.
Hot take, but I don’t think it should recover. If anything, I think a combination of low unemployment, higher wages, and a labor force participation rate of ~45-55% would be a sweet spot to aim for:
* It would indicate more single income households able to make ends meet and live higher quality lives
* It would suggest more stay-at-home parents to rear children, which is only possible in a safe and stable economic environment
* It’d also suggest a higher amount of community engagement, rather than mere working and resting.
* A rise in successful single-income households would also suggest improvements in cost of living affordability
In our current world, where we expect both parents to work full-time jobs to survive (because the cost of everything assumes a married couple employed full-time, especially in cities), this number is bad; in a healthier society, it might be a good thing.
I’d argue in favor of deflating costs or raising wages instead of increasing labor force participation, but that’s my personal soapbox.
That's like someone hearing about a landmine problem with people getting their legs blown off, and saying "it's a good thing, as wings are better anyway, and they'll be able to just fly wherever they want" - when nobody is getting wings or mentioned anything about wings.
Likewise, nobody said the higher unemployment is combined with higher wages (it's combined with worse jobs and inflation), or that it indicates "more single income households able to make ends meet and live higher quality lives" (rather, family households live hand to mounth, and single with no kids still have troubles financially).
And of course there's absolutely no indication or real possibility that this will be the case.
>I’d argue in favor of deflating costs or raising wages instead of increasing labor force participation, but that’s my personal soapbox.
Why not also give everybody a free pony while at it? So they can spend all that quality time they gain from not having a job in 2026.
For one thing, people to divest themselves of the notion "leaving money on the table" is a bad thing. It's part of the affordability crisis and why two income households are the default. It's already priced in as they say. Until that Ethic gets revised, and all the ethical arbitagers are found and eliminated with extreme prejudice, that vision cannot come to fruition. Because the price you pay will be adjusted to reflect your maximum actuarial capacity to earn. Fun bit is, you on the bottom don't get to make the decisions that effect that change. The people at the top/in the .001% do, because if everyone else made the change first without dealing with them, they're sitting on enough assets to buyout everyone else adopting the new paradigm. Then again, there's also the question of "just let em do it, then ignore their claim." Long as everyone else is in alignment, and we just ignore those people, a second system ought to be able to stabilize to which the .001% can either sync to, or remain ostracized. It does require full solidarity from the 99.99% though. That means literally treating the horded wealth and businesses of these people as no good. Destabilizing in the short term; probably gonna hurt like a sumabitch. A theoretical offramp to the vision, however, it is.
> For one thing, people to divest themselves of the notion "leaving money on the table" is a bad thing.
Unfortunately people will never divest themselves of this notion.
The only reason people "left money on the table" prior to the recent-ish past was incomplete information and a slow feedback loop, but with modern tech they have all the information they need to squeeze out every last dollar.
Algorithmic large database systems (like RealPage for apartments) were already causing this problem pre-AI and now it is going to get supercharged.
The only thing that would stop it is government regulation, and... good luck with that, at least in the US. The government here is well and fully captured by the same people vacuuming up all the wealth.
>The return of the proceeds of labor to the people who performed the labor.
It's funny you bring that up, given the statistics on this shows that it's been trending down, but nowhere close to the amount you'd expect from the popular discourse.
A lot, because no system or crisis has an "easy solution". That said, a few highlights I've chewed on:
* From the social angle, we have got to address this notion of gender roles being a prerequisite for such a societal outcome. It's not a "women are homemakers and men are breadwinners" type bullshit, and it's not penalizing the homemaker by robbing them of personal growth. It's acknowledging that some of us - for whatever reason at all - may prefer contributing to the success of the home and community rather than the success of a business, and that's a perfectly valid path to follow in life with its own societal rewards and benefits that cannot be directly captured in terms of GDP or wealth. If a woman wants to have a high-growth career while the husband stays at home to raise the kids, we shouldn't be shaming or humiliating either participant for their decisions since both are valid not just to themselves, but to society as a whole.
* From a business perspective, we also need to figure out the right balance of regulations and reforms that prohibit (and meaningfully punish) discrimination based on these sorts of choices. Women shouldn't be penalized for having kids, men shouldn't be penalized for choosing to be a homemaker (full or part-time), and vice versa. It's acknowledging that gaps are normal because life is chaos, and rebuilding work around the flexibility to adapt to life rather than jamming everything into fixed blocks of time or location. COVID showed us this is possible, but the whiplash after shows that those in power refuse to change willingly; changes must come from external actors and forces because power refuses to acquiesce otherwise.
* From a government point of view, it's a lot of social safety nets and reforms. It's fixing healthcare, it's making childcare affordable, it's raising minimum wages; it's also raising taxes on multi-income households proportionate to earned income (higher taxes on higher incomes), expanding affordability programs into higher income tiers (such that unorthodox households aren't punished - this mainly targets immigrant and queer multi-family households), prioritizing "right-size" homeownership (taxing 2nd+ homes at higher rates, or large homes/land plots in dense urban areas at higher rates than multi-family or smaller-plot homes), expanding transit options to reduce costs of vehicle ownership and improve job opportunities, the list goes on for miles. The overarching goal is one of intentional vision rather than piecemeal band-aids: building the legal structures and safety nets needed to not merely "promote" this outcome, but all but mandate it via incentives and punishments. It's as much about reassuring people that their choice is valid and will result in a long and prosperous life as much as it is handcuffing Capital from squeezing blood from stones for shareholder value.
* EDIT: One thing Government could be doing to improve things now, that seems incredibly counter-intuitive on its face, is to stop means-testing benefits. We need to stop caring who is acceptable enough to get social benefits, and instead focus on ensuring benefits are used effectively regardless of who gets them - directly paying landlords instead of handing out vouchers, for instance, or curtailing SNAP/EBT uses away from ultra-processed foods, or just extending Medicare to everybody. Yes, there's a lot of questions around sustainability of these programs, but that's all the more reason to maximize their pool of users, cut out middlemen, and raise taxes to specifically cover costs of services instead of printing money to cover deficits. Patrick Boyle's latest video actually touches on this in the UK, where even high earners aren't motivated to do more work or earn more pay because losing means-tested benefits will cost them more than they would earn.
And that's just the high-level stuff. It's a lot to think about because it requires us to collectively fight for an intended future instead of just one-offing problems individually. That's a lot of work that not a lot of folks have ever had to do outside of minority spaces, and those muscles are going to need to be trained back into use over time. It's not impossible, but it is incredibly hard.
It's bad, yeah, especially for folks on the job market (it me). Some statistics first, from my own job search logs:
* Since I hit the pavement in late January, I've tracked 100 job applications
* Of those 100, only 7 have turned into interviews
* Of those seven interviews, 3 turned into second-round
* ~50% of all applications never receive a response
* ~20% of rejections for any reason have the role re-posted within thirty days
* For rejections stating "higher quality applications", that role re-post rate is closer to 50%, suggesting ATS systems culling too many candidates to fill the role or ghost jobs
* Despite my state requiring salary requirements be posted in the JD, only around 70% of postings included what could be considered "reasonable" estimates
* 100% of interviews have been for local employers requiring 3+ days on-site
And now, some observations not captured in the data directly:
* Employers are trying to "under-title" folks; Senior roles want to hire former Leads, and Management roles want next-rung candidates for prior-rung titles (e.g., hiring what should be a Senior Manager for an entry-level management role)
* Employers are also trying to underpay workers by a large margin, especially folks coming from Big Tech ("We don't pay {SV_FIRM} money" while offering salaries below the local 50%ile for the role in question); they're blaming a "surplus of tech talent", which may or may not be true (I lack the data to prove either way)
* The two above points are in conflict, because rent/mortgages in these areas are so steep that even with major lifestyle changes to cut costs, these wages simply aren't survivable for local areas
* "Credential Creep" is back in force: Architect certs required for mid-level engineering roles, buzzwords prioritized over outcomes and achievements, and AI ATS' rejecting qualified candidates flat-out
* College Degrees are relevant again as a means of pruning candidates; fifteen years of experience is irrelevant for a lot of Senior roles if you don't have a BS or Masters, which wasn't the case even last year
* Industry-specialization is also back, even for roles where industry specialization is generally moot or easily picked up (e.g., Corporate IT stuff)
* A significant number (~75-85%) of roles explicitly reject H1B and other visa workers; not a problem for me (Citizen), but this is the worst possible time to be job hunting on a non-LPR status.
And now, my personal experiences:
* There's a very strong attitude of "you're being entitled" when it comes down to salary negotiations, even when you show your math for essentials - and share prior compensation history reflecting the cuts you've already taken since your Big Tech salary to "rejoin the market".
* Employers generally have no clue how expensive it is to live right now, especially in major metros; one such employer who balked at my comp floor genuinely had no clue the median rent was three and a half grand per month.
* Compensation seems particularly tilted towards working couples; as in, neither alone makes enough to survive, and employers assume you have a FTE spouse to shore up finances so they can pay you less
* Employers also don't seem to know what they actually want or need. Specialist Engineer roles (e.g., Cloud Engineer, Network Engineer) cite required experience and expertise with the full technology stack inclusive of ERP and HRIS nowadays, which is something that used to be handled by a specific team for the entirety of my career thus far, even in smaller (<1k) orgs. I've also seen Architect roles demanding Help Desk work, and Software Dev roles who want experience supporting Entra.
* AI does not feature in as many interviews as I would've thought. The few times it does, it's very much a "that's nice, but we're taking a wait and see approach" attitude
* There's a lot of eagerness to hire domestically again (I think even middle managers were tired of outsourcing or offshoring), but a lack of budget to afford domestic talent.
Ultimately, it's pretty bleak - but still better than last year, at least thus far (~300 apps, ~2 companies interviewed with, 1 offer in 2025). AI isn't the value-add I was sold on by career counselors and LinkedIn (huge surprise there /s), and there definitely seems to be the appetite to hire, but not the realism of what to expect or how much it'll cost. I very much view it as a sort of tug-of-war at the moment, between workers who did everything expected of them and have cut to the bone already, and employers who somehow think they can pay <50%ile wages while mandating 4-days on-site in a major metro for experienced talent.
If you're an employer looking to hire, I have some advice:
* Ditch the AI ATS or AI summaries and read resumes, especially if you're requiring local presence.
* Understand what you need (and what that will cost you) before posting the JD
* Understand the local cost of living, and budget accordingly (i.e., if your Senior Engineer can't afford median rent, they're not going to stick around when things improve)
* If you value loyalty and aren't paying TC to afford a median home in the area, then you don't actually value loyalty
* Don't pigeonhole yourself with hyper-specific candidates as a means of winnowing down applicants; that level of specialization will flee the second they get a better offer elsewhere
* Post salaries in the JD, required or not, so you don't waste your time with candidates whose expectations don't align with your budget
I'm early in my search, but compensation seems all over the place. From the recruiters I've talked to they've been pretty baffled too about compensation given the market. I know one place a recruiter called me about was looking for absolute unicorn talent (like 15 years of experience in multiple very different domains), but their salary was like 70k less than I made at my previous job and when I asked about titles they said it was "flat" and everyone was just a "software dev".
I don't want to sound like it's all a horror show though, I've had some interviews that have gone well with companies being sensible, so I think there's good stuff out there. But it's overall a rough market.
There is a definite compensation mismatch in the market between what workers need to survive, and what employers are willing to pay. You’re not alone in seeing this, even if it’s not widely reported yet.
I'm also looking right now and a lot of that resonates with me. The posted salary ranges are often a complete joke as you noted. "The pay band for this role is $80,000-250,000 commensurate with experience and interview performance". Yeah OK buddy are you seriously trying to tell me you have multiple people with the exact same job title making salaries over $100k apart? Feels like they're just giving the finger to lawmakers through malicious compliance.
I've also run into the industry specialization roadblock a few times. Got turned down by a fintech company after multiple interview rounds because I did not have banking industry experience, for example. I guess I get it as a tie breaker but I've operated in a PCI compliant environment for years, seems like that should count as relevant experience? Also if you're going to dumpster candidates without banking experience why on earth did you waste several hours of your staff's time giving me tech screens?
Job hunting has always sucked. But it feels particularly busted at the moment. The process is miserable. If you've coasted to an easy hiring in the last year, you're either amazing (and hats off to you!) or got very lucky.
The salary ranges are complete jokes on either end: they're either malicious compliance like you pointed out, or completely out of touch with reality.
My example of that was when I applied for an Architect role (as I'm at that point in my upward career trajectory), and they asked me instead to apply for a Senior Admin role as they "didn't know what the Architect role would look like yet". I did, I included my comp target, and got the hard sell on why I was being unreasonable and should take {2016_PAY}/{$100k below SV_FIRM} instead. I mentioned my absolute floor was {$75k lower than SV_FIRM}/{$25k lower than my target}, ran him through my math (median rent for the area, on-site expectations, commute costs, food costs, insurance costs, 50/30/20 budgeting, etc), and pointed out that floor would only cover needs (50) and savings (20) with no fun money (30) whatsoever. Ultimately I withdrew my name entirely because the guy just wouldn't listen to me, and all but demanded I be grateful for his number in the current economy.
I suspect something similar is going on with another company that's seemingly ghosted me, after I stated I was targeting their upper boundary of their listed comp range - still $85k below {SV_FIRM}, but with growth potential towards Architect and Director-type IT roles. Even when I'm fine eating huge pay cuts for work (and falling off the homebuying ladder, as not even {SV_FIRM} paid house-purchasing money), the employers out there really do want perfect diamonds for the cost of Halloween Trinkets.
> Also if you're going to dumpster candidates without banking experience why on earth did you waste several hours of your staff's time giving me tech screens?
This is also something that's grinding my gears. Had an investment firm put me through six technical interviews with glowing recommendations every step of the way only for the seventh round (CIO) to put the kibosh on it without a reason and after showing up unprepared and disinterested. Also had companies say I lack financial discipline experience when I've literally built models, showback systems, budget forecasts, and cemented six-figures of monthly savings in prior roles; same with companies saying I "lack compliance experience" despite calling out running infra in highly regulated environments, performing compliance audits for clients, and uplifting infra to satisfy compliance regimes.
If I didn't know better, I'd say the entire HR process is just feeding shit into chatbots and letting them make hiring decisions. Nobody seems to actually care about the humans involved or the wider systems at play.
It's immensely frustrating, but I can only keep on keeping on until something changes. I don't need to win every application, I just need to win one.
Man, I'm disappointed by the comments. Like, moreso than usual.
The cherry-picking of points to support your preconceived conclusions about the author ("he owns three houses he's better off than everyone else" did ya'll not read any of the context?), the judging of someone refusing to compromise personal values for temporary comfort, the denial on display that the country and life he lived is somehow invalid or fake simply because you personally haven't experienced it...
Just, fuck, ya'll. And you wonder why polarization is spreading even on sites like HN or Slashdot, in what used to be tech-centric circles. This is why: you cannot comprehend the lived experiences of others and their personal value systems, you refuse to acknowledge the immense role that luck plays in life for a huge swath of the planet, and you apply your personal narrative to total strangers while also crowing about how people need to be more entrepreneurial, or take more risks, or sacrifice more.
One personal snippet about how he placed his veganism as a personal principle in life, and suddenly so many feel comfortable saying he doesn't deserve help.
One mention of his work renovating homes to try and pull in reliable income while also caring for his mother, and somehow he's just as bad as Blackstone or Bezos, nevermind the admission he lives in an off-grid trailer himself.
Do ya'll even hear yourselves think before posting? "He needs to be entrepreneurial, but only in the methods I personally accept," "He went to college, it's his own fault for taking on that debt", "he complains about being hungry but chooses to be vegan."
Fucking christ. I just...I have no words for how disgustingly self-centered and willfully ignorant so many of you are. Always looking for the tiniest nitpick to unravel a personal narrative to suit your own ends, rather than earnestly listening to the message being shared and the plea being made. The notion that the only perspectives worth listening to come from folks who made all the right decisions you would've obviously made, and that any human mistake is solely personal responsibility regardless of systemic influence.
Ya'll need to learn to listen more, and judge less.
Just...that attitude right there, that is part of the problem. That humans who struggle but stand on principle somehow are less deserving than those who willfully throw away their morals or values for comfort.
In that moment, he chose to stand by what was important to him knowing the risks involved. That's one of the things I believe makes us human: the ability to sacrifice our personal benefit for greater causes than ourselves. To suggest he should throw that aside so as not to prolong hunger, instead of critique the system that demands he sell his principles for unhealthy foodstuffs "they" deem appropriate?
This started decades before COVID, and has been summarily ignored for the entire time. We’re still insuring properties in areas we known sea level rise and climate change make uninsurable, we still refuse to let the government negotiate with or dictate rates, we still tie healthcare to employment, and we still let manufacturers sell top-tier/unrepairable vehicles while constantly discontinuing anything remotely affordable or repairable.
The market isn’t going to correct itself now that we have enough data to know where to squeeze next, and how hard it can go. The only way to unwind this disaster is meaningful regulations and wholesale reforms.
How much has the sea level actually risen? Our most expensive flood in terms of insurance losses was the Great Flood of 1993 which had nothing to do with sea levels.
It’s a vicious cycle, but something needs to pump the brakes before the metaphorical engine explodes.
* Stop tying healthcare to private insurers and employers. State-level single-payer models by default via fixed payroll deductions per employee, and let the government dictate or negotiate costs.
* Re-work incentives for efficient utility usage. Incentivize self-generation for power through lower electric rates if a certain percentage of your consumption is generated on-site, for instance. Also, stop subsidizing huge consumers (like data centers) by raising customer rates, and keep expanding renewables and battery storage to depress costs in the long haul
* Those insurance rates keep going up because healthcare continues rising and repair costs are increasingly more expensive or on par with replacement costs. Right to repair can lower auto/property insurance rates over time by making shit repairable, and liability/workers comp can begin coming down once healthcare is meaningfully addressed
* Not being mentioned in the report (but raised by other commenters) is the general cost of living will continue driving wages higher (along with costs to replace those wages from injury or loss via insurance schemes) until and unless we actually address the underlying crises. This means lowering housing costs, lowering rent, lowering transit costs (either through cheaper cars or expanded public transport, ideally both), lowering food costs, lowering utility costs, lowering healthcare costs, lowering childcare costs (universal childcare or incentives for more single-earner/single-income households), etc.
This report hits the highlights, but this is a huge issue that’s only going to get worse if we don’t start seriously addressing the myriad of root causes.
> Stop tying healthcare to private insurers and employers. State-level single-payer models by default via fixed payroll deductions per employee, and let the government dictate or negotiate costs.
Most state-run workers compensation and Medicaid funds are already insolvent. Until that gets resolved, no attempt at creating a single payer fund is possible.
> stop subsidizing huge consumers (like data centers) by raising customer rates, and keep expanding renewables and battery storage to depress costs in the long haul
Most DC projects in the US have already integrated renewable and battery storage systems thanks to Biden-era subsidizes and capacity building.
Utilities are using data centers as a scapegoat - the reality is most are stuck with fiscal liabilities due to COVID along with insurance and raising prices as a result.
> Right to repair can lower auto/property insurance rates over time by making shit repairable, and liability/workers comp can begin coming down once healthcare is meaningfully addressed
I support right-to-repair at a personal level as a tinkerer, but that wouldn't move the needle for the insurance problem.
The big issue is the COVID pandemic era liabilities that continue to require to be paid out to this day.
It's the same for workers comp as most workers comp funds are already insolvent.
> Not being mentioned in the report (but raised by other commenters) is the general cost of living will continue driving wages higher...
Becuase that's not something that dramatically impacts the bottom line in most industries - most businesses can afford increasing salaries a couple dollars an hour by reducing capex next year, reducing hours for existing employees, or moving employees to the salaried bucket.
But if my insurance premiums are constantly increase by 7-20% YoY it becomes difficult to manage.
Edit: can't reply
> What do you (sic) proscribe as a solution then?
F#ck if I know.
This is a polycrisis, and each state will have to solve stuff individually because of the federal nature of the US. The pandemic was brutal and we're still facing feeling it's reverberations to this day.
They're all too happy to downvote and naysay anyone demanding change, but never have an alternative beyond personal nihilism or fatalism. "This is definitely a problem, but fuck if I know how to solve it, and if I can't solve it then nobody else can discuss solving it either."
> Most state-run workers compensation and Medicaid funds are already insolvent. Until that gets resolved, no attempt at creating a single payer fund is possible.
Because the government handcuffs itself willingly by prohibiting negotiations with providers and companies on costs at all levels. Which I point out multiple times in the comment. But you're right, solvency is an issue, and a fixable one: stop giving employers tax breaks on such a critical benefit as healthcare, raise taxes on those most able to pay them, and allow the government to set rates and care standards as a baseline that employers and private insurers must compete against.
These problems aren't hard to solve, it just requires accepting such controversial thoughts as, "y'know, maybe shareholder value should come last as a matter of public health".
> Utilities are using data centers as a scapegoat - the reality is most are stuck with fiscal liabilities due to COVID along with insurance and raising prices as a result.
Got evidence of this? Because there's mounting evidence from co-ops, private utilities, and public utilities that actually, no, new DC builds are not only not paying their fair share, but also employing (sometimes illicit) power generators on-site due to being unable to acquire enough power at affordable (to them) rates.
>The big issue is the COVID pandemic era liabilities that continue to require to be paid out to this day.
You keep saying this, but my counter-point - nay, my original point - is that this existed before COVID. What might be happening in this precise moment still have ties to COVID, sure, but the fundamental systems, incentives, and structures existed long before COVID and have not been addressed.
> Becuase that's not something that dramatically impacts the bottom line in most industries - most businesses can afford increasing salaries a couple dollars an hour by reducing capex next year, reducing hours for existing employees, or moving employees to the salaried bucket.
Payroll is one of - if not the - single biggest expense in business; it's why they're all wet at the prospect of AI replacing all labor, even if it's a fever dream. Workers are already squeezed to the bone, and companies - or more specifically, corporate leaders - have decades of history of refusing to pay wages commensurate with productivity gains or cost of living adjustments. Payroll also has knock-on effects on insurance (the more workers make, the higher insurance rates need to be to cover potential insurable losses), so yeah, there's a bit of a cycle here where wages go up, making workmen's comp go up, making wages go up, etc. You can already see this in unemployment benefit caps that haven't kept pace with wage increases since the 2008 recession (MA still caps benefits at such a low amount that they can only barely cover a month of average rent - if you qualify for the maximum amount).
> The pandemic was brutal and we're still facing feeling it's reverberations to this day.
The pandemic was a blip on par with the 2008 recession; yes, there are tails to it (just like 2008), but those tails only evolved because of the underlying systems and structures that allowed the problem to escalate in the first place. Simply handwashing everything as "oopsie, pandemic happened" is dangerously ignorant of the machinations still underpinning everything going on, and represents a refusal to accept that long-term problems require long-term solutions - which in turn requires acknowledging that these problems didn't just spontaneously evolve overnight, or during a single crisis.
Finally, some good hardware announcements. It nails almost every common use case, with few flaws or exceptions.
* If we're talking "child's first laptop", this gives them a full-fat desktop OS with ample power to get into various mischief (experimenting with audio in Garageband, making videos in iMovie, writing stories in whatever text editor they fancy, presentations and spreadsheets for school, and the ability to install whatever they like with a quick reformat/refresh if things get borked). $599 isn't quite "disposable", but it is "accessible".
* For "parental computer", this also fits the bill. The extra $100 doubles storage and adds TouchID, enabling Apple Pay on-device. It's affordable, resilient, and manageable by remote support (i.e., us kids). 8GB of RAM is more than enough for common tasks for most folks, provided they work intentionally and not just stack tabs infinitely.
* As a Chromebook alternative, the results are a bit more mixed. Sure, durability seems higher at first blush, and the user experience is better, but as @runjake points out Chromebooks play a "numbers game" Apple won't compete on: rock-bottom pricing, disposability, replaceability, and integration with Google's (mostly free or heavily discounted) educational tooling. For schools that have the CapEx to move back to Apple's ecosystem (or are in it, but want to expand it), the Neo is compelling; for public school systems lacking disposable funds, it's a harder sell - though maybe moot, given the studies linking negative outcomes to early and forced technology adoption in schools.
* For businesses, meet your new "loaner laptop". Keeping a few of these on-hand with corporate profiles preloaded and MDM/DEP managing provisioning makes these the ideal daily replacement while a laptop is being serviced or forgotten at home. Keeping a half-dozen of these ready to go is half the cost of Macbook Airs or Pros waiting in the wings, and perfect for 90% of SaaS-reliant business use cases.
* Speaking of business, say hello to your new "contractor special". Cheap enough to not fret if they're lost or destroyed, but still managed by the same impeccable MDM/DEP tooling, and with enough headroom for most contractor work.
For every niche where you don't mind paying the premium for a better UX in hardware (software is a bit...questionable, at the moment) and don't need a monster of power, this thing fits the bill almost perfectly. That said, I do have some annoyances with the Gen1 that I'd like to see addressed in the next revision:
* Don't make MagSafe a premium feature. It saves cables, it saves ports, and it saves computers. It should be standard.
* I get that the USB ports are limited by the A18 Pro's onboard controllers, but stop silently making different USB ports. Either label them, make them identical, or drop the lower-spec ones entirely. USB-C at USB2 speeds and missing DP video is dumb, and it makes the user experience worse since the ports aren't labelled somehow.
* I know I'll never get it, but either hardware mute toggles to keep speakers from going off during class/meetings, or profiles that let IT mute/disable speakers entirely to force headphones.
I built a showback model at a prior org. Re-used shelfware for the POC, did the research on granular costs for storage, compute, real estate, electricity, HVAC maintenance, hardware amortization, the whole deal. Could tell you down to the penny how much a given estate cost on-prem.
Simple. Elegant. $0 in spend to get running in production, modest spend to expand into public cloud (licensing, mainly). Went absolutely nowhere.
Got RIFed. On the way out the door, I hear a whole-ass team did the same thing, using additional budget, with lower confidence results. The biggest difference of all? My model gave you the actual cost in local currency, theirs gave you an imagined score.
The complexity (cost of a team, unnecessary scoring) was rewarded, not the simplicity.
* You gotta force yourself out. There's no trick, you just gotta fuckin' do it. It's hard. It sucks. You've also gotta do it if only to make sure you're varying your day and creating the opportunity for chance encounters. I spent fifteen months bottled up alone and it was only through the good graces of friends that I didn't...yeah.
* Eat out more, specifically for the human interaction. Find a local restaurant with a good deal on food (like a happy hour), and head there once a week for a meal you didn't make, and to be surrounded by strangers. Even just a "Yes Sir/Ma'am" and similar pleasantries will help, weirdly enough, because it's direct human contact. If there's a trivia night, even better - Buffalo Wild Wings was my brief go-to for that sort of thing.
* You gotta learn to love yourself, somehow. If there's an aspect you don't like, set about fixing it. For me, it was weight and my soft skills, so I worked on both in the time I could with the energy I had. Being alone means if you don't like yourself, you're never going to be in good spirits.
* You're also not really alone, depending on perspective. Setup a bird feeder and just sit and watch it. Talk to the wildlife, silly as that sounds. Your pets help, but they're "at home", while the rest of the world is decidedly not "at home". You gotta get out of the home if you don't want to be alone.
* You mentioned playing games, and I'll add that's actually what kept me sane during those fifteen months of solo unemployment. I joined a multiplayer game server community, worked my way into administration, made friends, ran events. Gaming can be a form of community if it's intentional, i.e. not just joining random lobbies to kill time.
Look, as someone still single at 39 (but blessedly living with my best friends), being alone sucks ass. There's no way around that, even for someone who generally enjoys their solitude. Lacking the warmth and intimacy of another person is debilitating in a way nothing else is, at least to me, but friends do help in their own way. We cook for each other, share our days, treat one another when we're dour, and do what we can to lift others up. So maybe I'm suggesting you reach out to other friends you may have in similar boats, see if they'd like to spend more time together.
Beyond that, some life lessons I've learned since I had more folks come into my life, that I use when I'm feeling alone or lonely again:
* Go to a city at night, downtown ideally. I look around at the empty buildings, the changing lights, the abandoned sidewalks. I remind myself I'm one of eight and a half billion people, on a single planet in a vast galaxy, itself a small part of an immense universe. Weirdly enough, the smallness of being helps me feel less alone, knowing how lucky I am to be amidst all this, right now.
* After the above, I grab a burger and a milkshake, because I deserve it.
* Pop in some earbuds, go outside for a walk, and dance. Fuck the onlookers, just exist for a moment outside your home. Prove to everyone else you're still here.
* VRChat has been damn helpful. Pop on my headset, drop into an avatar that reflects me in the moment, and world hop. Nobody judges what you do in VR, provided you're not breaking instance rules, and there's so many people there to hang out with, all while staying home. It legit got me through COVID.
* Run a game night! Gathering around Jackbox from every corner of the globe for an hour or two of weekly shitposting also got us all through COVID. Just make sure to all be in voice chat or video conferencing to rib one another.
As tired and cliche as this is, the last point I'll say is that this is exactly what the prior phase of your life was: a chapter. Chapters have endings, and this one is no different. Prepare for the long haul, but hopefully you find someone - and something - better, sooner. You're not alone in being alone, but you'll remain alone only as long as you choose to be alone.
Get out there. Force social interactions. Build those muscles.
You got this.
reply