The Off Topic Topic

[alfred russel]

But isn't that traditional outsourcing? It's been going on for decades and will carry on as will on-shoring when there are issues or the risks and costs are too high.

No. Traditional outsourcing involves moving your accounts payable function to India. This is moving Bob the senior analyst's role to India.

I'm not sure it's necessarily that affected by the move to WFH - my point on internet outages is exactly that with traditional outsourcing you have less reslience risk than if you move to a sort of global WFH model.

I don't understand this at all. In half an hour I'm jumping on a call with a guy that is reporting to me working in Manila. We talk every day and his internet has never been out. I'm not sure why it would because he has access to an office in a business district.

I guess Manila is probably marginally more likely to totally go dark than a US or UK city, but that seems like a rather remote risk.

[Tamas]

There are a lot of considerations for cross-border work when you are talking about something more complex than writing an article or drawing a nice picture.

For example, more than a decade ago, my Hungarian workplace got most of the IT work the company was outsourcing from Western Europe because data security standards would not let their clients' data be handled from India.

Yes, you can do stuff like contract a company in India employing coders to do the code-monkey level stuff but that's been happening for quite a while now. If your job has not been taken abroad yet, chances are it won't be now either, although there will be some exceptions probably. By and large though I don't expect a mass exodus of jobs.

[Sheilbh]

No. Traditional outsourcing involves moving your accounts payable function to India. This is moving Bob the senior analyst's role to India.

Yeah. But the issues/risks are the same, no?

Do you trust your outsourcing provider to be doing that function/role for you, if not then maybe you need to set up in that location? Then it's costs/benefits - with those issues of culture, IP risk, tax, regulation etc. I think the impact of covid could increase that, but I'm not sure I see as direct a link as with changes that have already happened and will happen across the bits of the world that had lockdowns and told everyone to WFH.

I don't understand this at all. In half an hour I'm jumping on a call with a guy that is reporting to me working in Manila. We talk every day and his internet has never been out. I'm not sure why it would because he has access to an office in a business district.

I guess Manila is probably marginally more likely to totally go dark than a US or UK city, but that seems like a rather remote risk.

If he's in an office in a business district, he's not WFH?

[alfred russel]

Sheilbh, to take the example of the company I gave, it is domiciled in the US and is listed on the NYSE. The contracts are in the US. The people fulfilling the contracts are (mostly, though not entirely) in low cost jurisdictions. Lots of the risks you are bringing up are mitigated by way this is set up.

The guy I just got off the phone with is working from home, because it was 10pm his time. I was fudging my answer because almost all the time we talk he is working from home, and it seems you are skeptical of internet access reliability in places like Manila. But we've never had a problem and he also has an office in the business district. So in theory if his home internet went down, he could just go to the office.

[Sheilbh]

I don't disagree with any of that I just don't really see the link to covid as catalyst - while I think companies moving to remote teams, reducing their office space etc is going to happen very quickly now and wouldn't have happened in that way without covid.

My point on infrastructure is actually just that you're more exposed. If you have an oursourcer it's their responsibility, if you have your own service centre then you have a lot of control, if you are hiring people directly in another country to WFH for you then you're relying on their home electricity/internet. And this applies whether it's high-cost (see the number of times senior people drop off calls because the internet is crap in their lovely house in the country ) or low-cost, but if you've got a presence in a jurisdiction you can probably more easily make an assessment on how reliable it's going to be. Again not insurmountable.

[alfred russel]

I don't disagree with any of that I just don't really see the link to covid as catalyst - while I think companies moving to remote teams, reducing their office space etc is going to happen very quickly now and wouldn't have happened in that way without covid.

I agree, but I think it is nuts that you have a shit ton of completely replaceable workers who spend their days staring into laptops who are now like, "this is so sweet, I never want to go into the office again" when their major competitive advantage over a person in a low cost jurisdiction is their ability to show up to meetings in person.

My point on infrastructure is actually just that you're more exposed. If you have an oursourcer it's their responsibility, if you have your own service centre then you have a lot of control, if you are hiring people directly in another country to WFH for you then you're relying on their home electricity/internet. And this applies whether it's high-cost (see the number of times senior people drop off calls because the internet is crap in their lovely house in the country ) or low-cost, but if you've got a presence in a jurisdiction you can probably more easily make an assessment on how reliable it's going to be. Again not insurmountable.

Whereever you have your operations, you are going to be exposed to infrastructure risk, and there is probably more risk that the business districts in India and the Philippines lose internet access versus London and Paris, but honestly I think the risks are very low in all four. I don't think you need to be in these markets to assess this.

[Josquius]

Recieved an odd random letter today. From the next town over, just 10 mins walk away. Hand written address to the house holder and inside a lengthy handwritten letter about jesus...
I guess that's one tactic to try to stop people throwing it away straight away but...
Couldn't you have posted this without a stamp?
And.... Why?

[Jacob]

Recieved an odd random letter today. From the next town over, just 10 mins walk away. Hand written address to the house holder and inside a lengthy handwritten letter about jesus...
I guess that's one tactic to try to stop people throwing it away straight away but...
Couldn't you have posted this without a stamp?
And.... Why?

We got a handwritten letter about Jesus from someone too. I guess it's an attempt to do the door-to-door proselytization that's required by their specific brand of evangelism while complying with Covid measures. And looking at and throwing out a letter is less of a bother than telling some people at the door that I'm not interested at all and please go away.

Honestly, I'm okay with it. I mean, I find door knocking Jesus pushers fairly annoying. And it's pretty clear that their activities are about them scoring enough points for their souls rather than anything to do with me. But I give them credit for carrying on without increasing transmission risks.

[Sheilbh]

I got a hand addressed leaflet from the Jehovah's Witnesses last week

[crazy canuck]

I feel left out

[Barrister]

Recieved an odd random letter today. From the next town over, just 10 mins walk away. Hand written address to the house holder and inside a lengthy handwritten letter about jesus...
I guess that's one tactic to try to stop people throwing it away straight away but...
Couldn't you have posted this without a stamp?
And.... Why?

We got a handwritten letter about Jesus from someone too. I guess it's an attempt to do the door-to-door proselytization that's required by their specific brand of evangelism while complying with Covid measures. And looking at and throwing out a letter is less of a bother than telling some people at the door that I'm not interested at all and please go away.

Honestly, I'm okay with it. I mean, I find door knocking Jesus pushers fairly annoying. And it's pretty clear that their activities are about them scoring enough points for their souls rather than anything to do with me. But I give them credit for carrying on without increasing transmission risks.

Why would you say that?  I'm pretty sure most evangelist types are genuinely concerned with the state of your soul (even if I find them annoying as well).

I find a firm 'Not interested - I'm satisfied with the Church I currently attend' shuts down most attempts pretty quickly - and you don't even need to tell them how often you attend.

[PDH]

I live in Santa Cruz.  I get flyers for "Surfing Churches" and the like.

[Duque de Bragança]

I got a hand addressed leaflet from the Jehovah's Witnesses last week

I got a handwritten letter in my mail box some months ago from Jehovah's Witnesses. In Portuguese. How did they get my address?

[Jacob]

Why would you say that?  I'm pretty sure most evangelist types are genuinely concerned with the state of your soul (even if I find them annoying as well).

It is my understanding that "spreading the good word" is a key part of what it is to be a good evangelical. Going door to door has got to be one of the least effective and most labour intensive ways to gain converts. That points to the conclusion that the labour is more important than the effectiveness. This is a point I've seen articulated by a number of people who were brought up as evangelical - and proselytized exactly like that. I did some quick googling on "witnessing" and it typically centres around it is good for the Christian doing it, and how it's a duty. Sure it mentions that it may help unbelievers see the light, but that's mostly tacked on at the end.

Separate, but aligned, I've also seen it articulated more than once by ex-proselytizers that one of the key functions of door-to-door is to convince the practitioners that the world is against them, increasing their sense of separation from the rest of the world and strengthening the bonds to the in-group. It's a pretty basic techniques for cults to build and maintain control over their followers. The outcome regarding "saving souls" isn't particularly key (though it's a nice bonus, of course), it's that the proselytizer sees how indifferent or even hostile the rest of the world is to their truth, thus increasing their commitment.

I find a firm 'Not interested - I'm satisfied with the Church I currently attend' shuts down most attempts pretty quickly - and you don't even need to tell them how often you attend.

For sure, though it's still more work than chucking out a letter. And typically answering the door interrupts whatever else I was doing. But yeah, it's not hard to tell them you're not interested. That said, strangers at my door are not entitled to know about my religious or spiritual practices. "I'm not interested, have a nice day" works fine. But not coming to my door and interrupting my day to sell membership in your particular flavour of faith works even better.

[Barrister]

Why would you say that?  I'm pretty sure most evangelist types are genuinely concerned with the state of your soul (even if I find them annoying as well).

It is my understanding that "spreading the good word" is a key part of what it is to be a good evangelical. Going door to door has got to be one of the least effective and most labour intensive ways to gain converts. That points to the conclusion that the labour is more important than the effectiveness. This is a point I've seen articulated by a number of people who were brought up as evangelical - and proselytized exactly like that. I did some quick googling on "witnessing" and it typically centres around it is good for the Christian doing it, and how it's a duty. Sure it mentions that it may help unbelievers see the light, but that's mostly tacked on at the end.

Separate, but aligned, I've also seen it articulated more than once by ex-proselytizers that one of the key functions of door-to-door is to convince the practitioners that the world is against them, increasing their sense of separation from the rest of the world and strengthening the bonds to the in-group. It's a pretty basic techniques for cults to build and maintain control over their followers. The outcome regarding "saving souls" isn't particularly key (though it's a nice bonus, of course), it's that the proselytizer sees how indifferent or even hostile the rest of the world is to their truth, thus increasing their commitment.

I mean, there's something to that... Take the Mormons.  You're generally required to go out on mission when you're 18-19, often to a foreign country.  Problem of course is 18-19 year olds from a foreign country aren't really the most effective missionaries.  I've always taken it more as a form of building solidarity and identity within the LDS church (and I would very much reject the label "cult").

But still, when you say "one of the least effective"... evangelism is hard.  Real hard.  There is no one single easy way to spread the Good News and get people's butts into church.  And the ways that are at least remotely effective all involve direct person to person contact.  Like going door to door.

So while I acknowledge your point, I still very much dispute that gaining new believers is 'just a nice bonus', and not an essential goal of the entire exercise.

I find a firm 'Not interested - I'm satisfied with the Church I currently attend' shuts down most attempts pretty quickly - and you don't even need to tell them how often you attend.

For sure, though it's still more work than chucking out a letter. And typically answering the door interrupts whatever else I was doing. But yeah, it's not hard to tell them you're not interested. That said, strangers at my door are not entitled to know about my religious or spiritual practices. "I'm not interested, have a nice day" works fine. But not coming to my door and interrupting my day to sell membership in your particular flavour of faith works even better.

I find it a little depressing that our society has grown so insular that a simple knock on the door is "interrupting my day".