It's not "garlic aioli". All aioli has garlic! It's "plain aioli".
this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2025
32 points (90.0% liked)
Ask Lemmy
36112 readers
2277 users here now
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Huh. Today I learned. Neat!
I work in IT and the worst thing to deal with is a manager who is also a super tech. Techs need to do tech and managers need to management .
Agreed. I've worked with/under great managers both with and without IT or tech background, and what they both have in common is that they left the IT/tech to the ones in IT/tech roles.
In fact, it took me two years of working with one of them to learn by accident they had an IT background, lol. All along I had been using layman's analogies to explain what was the problem, what was needed, and why, when I could have just explained it straight.
I'm going into software project management and have a ComSci education and development expertise. I'm starting to look forward to getting everything dumbed down for me just for me to ask a highly technical follow up.
It depends.
My issue right now is having to supervise "tech" equivalents and they get caught off guard because they try to do shortcuts that they think they can get away with and I point out how those shortcuts break what they are trying to do.
The place I've worked at for over a decade now Darth Vader'd the deal and implemented mandatory scheduled overtime after cutting crews to skeleton. I'd rather get fired than work overtinme, so initially I refused all of it without justifying why.
After a year of doing that a manager tried to scare me into complying, but I just kept asking what the minimum amount of days I'd have to work OT per year and he refused to answer, and I never got written up.
So I work 2 OT shifts a year. They still haven't fired me 6 years later. I guess training a new guy in a specialised position is too much work vs putting up with my stubborn ass.
Crazy that paying overtime is cheaper long term.
Not really.
Salaried employees don't get time and a half pay for overtime, but many companies will offer straight time over 40 hours as an inducement to work OT.
The cost of insurance, benefits, equipment, rent, and overhead staff to support people gets spread over more hours, so the effective overhead rate drops and the company makes more money per extra hour worked.
In some industries, the support costs are so high it is cheaper to pay time and a half than it is to pay the overhead costs for a new employee.
In Canada (or BC anyway) they need to pay the time and a half, and there's technically no such thing as salaried. If you work over 40 even if you're on salary, it's over time at 1.5x.
However, there is a clause in BC at least that says high tech workers are exempt from the 1.5x rate for overtime.
It's utter bullshit. Discriminated against in written law.
Wow TIL
In my case it's hourly wage. Union, we get double pay on overtime plus meal allowance.
I just value free time more than that.
Accountinq/management should adapt to the company way of working and not the other way around. I've seen project getting split in a way making no sense technically speaking, and product getting senseless names/reference but this is how SAP works, and accounting needs it that way
The problem is that accounting/management also need to adapt to legal/compliance requirements that may make no sense or don't fit the company way of working. And that moving away from SAP would be a gargantuan task with no clear and immediate benefit to the company.
If you can't spell the word, I doubt your expertise in that subject. If you can't spell a lot of words, then the doubt increases. If you sound like a used-car salesman ("the ask", "the spend"), a cliquey teen ("literally"), or a moron ("till tomorrow") then I will judge you as such and know I don't need to read anything you write.
Bro, like, literally, that just seems kinda harsh, man.
Some people are shit at spelling. That's damn near ableist behavior to suggest that tbh
Anything (edible) you can do with chicken, you can do better with pork
Pork noodle soup? I can see it.
Can confirm. Similarly, pork and noodles is amazing
This can't be true until boar taint is eliminated. Pork (apart from bacon) is trash food
Yea, you’re right. I wish more restaurants got on board.
Not quite anything. And veal works better in many cases.
Am I tripping even harder rn?
I copied it, except non-technical this time.
nope, that has been posted before. or we are both tripping
If you can't explain how something works, you don't know how it works.
Nah, some people are just bad with words. They can know how something works but can't explain it because their vocabulary doesn't capture some of the nuances. I've seen this a lot in self-taught experts, especially.
Plus there's always the possibility that the vocabulary is limited from the audience perspective. I definitely know how certain things work, but detail is lost when I oversimplify it for my kids or something, because I'm explaining it to them rather than to a more knowledgeable adult with a stronger base.
I'm not a stickler for vocabulary when I ask people to explain something. You can use other words if you want, describe it like you're a caveman, draw a sketch, even explain it with interpretive dance for all I care.
And it is fine if some detail is lost in the explanation. However, you should be able to communicate it in some manner.
I mean, the linguistic mastery necessary to be able to talk around gaps in vocabulary is still itself a skill set completely distinct from knowledge about a different subject.
Plenty of skills aren't easily reduced to verbal explanations, or even the ability to teach. Plenty of world class athletes become mediocre coaches, frustrated that their players don't seem to get things the way they used to. Same with musicians, actors, public speakers (merely repeating the words of a speech won't necessarily carry the same charisma and gravitas), and all sorts of other experts.
One can know something without being able to explain it. That doesn't invalidate the knowledge.
Which is why I mentioned other ways to explain things. If you're dealing with a spatial problem but can't draw what you are trying to explain, that is indicative that you don't know what you're dealing with.
It's the reason why I mentioned communication beyond the written word.
If you're dealing with a spatial problem but can't draw what you are trying to explain, that is indicative that you don't know what you're dealing with.
I really feel like you're digging in your heels on a fundamentally flawed point. Plenty of people are bad at drawing. That doesn't make them bad at visualizing or reasoning spatially, or somehow invalidate the spatial understanding that they do have.
My ability to explain things in Spanish isn't all that well correlated with my internal knowledge of those things, but is more closely correlated with my Spanish skills in those subjects. At the same time, there are nonverbal people who understand stuff without the ability to meaningfully convey messages to other humans.
The ability to communicate is its own skill, independent from other areas of knowledge, such that the correlation between ability to explain to others and the actual internal understanding is weak, at best.
And didn't even credit the original question. Such a coward.
Credit to you 💕
Water isn't wet. In the same way my clothes aren't clothed and bacteria aren't sick.
What industry is this?
But bacterias can be sick, phages are a thing.
WFH would work a lot better if junior staff asked anywhere near the level of questions they ask if they were in the office.