You must log in or register to comment.
There are exceptions. My ex CEO and his nepo kids demanded ultrawides so they could more efficiently watch Fox News and get scammed by horny MILFS in their area that want to hook up NOW.
This is true up until a point, and then the pattern starts to reverse. Like, the receptionist isn’t going to get 2 monitors. They’re likely to get one monitor and a very old desktop, or an old laptop.
Edit: Also an intern / co-op student / work experience student, etc. is probably as low as you can go on the totem pole of office work. I bet in many cases they’re not even assigned a permanent office / cubicle since they’re expected to shadow / be mentored by a variety of people. As a result, they probably get a second-hand, used laptop.
And, if the company has retail sales, techs who do installations, etc. they’re often very low on the totem pole, and they’re often not getting a computer at all. Maybe in some cases they’d get a “work phone”, so they’d have the same kind of equipment as the CEO, but effectively be at the opposite end of the pole from them.
And sometimes you have techbro CEO who has like a video wall for no particularly good reason.
Sometimes, rich people like to cosplay being poor and unimportant.
It’s like, I have a 13" laptop, a 15" inch one, and two monitors at my desk with a dock… But so the my director… Actually, he doesn’t have the 13" one! Am I actually the director?
Which do you use most often?
A CEO might have a nice desktop, but is always out playing golf and so mostly uses his phone.
Forget using his phone screen, all an important CEO needs is wireless earbuds
Heh, I bet if you’re the CEO of a megacorp, you might not even carry your own electronics. You just have a gaggle of assistants around you who you bark orders at, and then they use their electronics to do something.
I’m at “iPad and enormous curved monitor connected to a laptop” so I guess I average out to upper-middle management. Which is shockingly accurate.
iPad, 2 phones, 2 laptops, and a double monitor. I own my own business with no employees so I do all the jobs.
deleted by creator
Importance, or lack of work contribution? Smaller screen = works less.
Importance as in payment, probably
They’ll say that their work is mainly talking to other people
Which is why they believe AI is the future.
It does everything they do.
Produce slop
Disgusting.
Well, if the company gets fined for mismanaging or committing fraud, who do you think they will fire?
A scapegoat is very important.
who do you think they will fire?
10 to 20 percent of the workforce, so the CEO still can get a bonus.
Exactly. This is America. 40% and install AI if it’s 2025 or later.
Yuuuup. My last company let go of 20% in a single round of layoffs
True for the phone and tablet, but for any sort of computer that is not true
I work on a laptop with virtual desktops and I am much more productive that way than with a big screen… Or two big screens.
Everything is in the center of my field of view, I know which VD of my 3x3 grid holds what. It’s much more efficient for me than bigger screens could ever be. And that is not for lack of trying!
It just depends on the person.
You just changed how I think about virtual screens. I feel like Khan being unloaded on by Kirk.
I decided long ago that I liked the single monitor with multiple desktops. But in my head they have always been a line of desktops instead of a grid.
Somewhere there is a mathematician who uses a hyper cube array of desktops…
When I discovered it can be arranged in a grid, it made VDs so much more useful.
Cause a line of the same amount of VDs (9)… Ugh, not fun haha
Even though you can map each to a shortcut, it’s still tougher to use than a grid with directional shortcuts!
How do you have your shortcuts set up for this? And if you don’t mind me asking, what desktop environment / window manager are you using?
I am using KDE’s Plasma 6 as a DE with Wayland. The compositor (window managers are a Xorg thing) is KWin
The shortcuts I use are Meta+Up/Down/Left/Right. I can’t remember if they’re default or if I set them this way.
I’ll often have documentation on another monitor, so I can full-screen my code and still reference the documentation without switching windows.
I prefer to switch down to the VD with the doc on fullscreen than noving my head to another monitor
VDs arranged in a grid ? Why ?
Faster switch. Think each column being 1-3 and each row as A-C
B2 is my terminals, B3 is my IDE, B1 is a secondary IDE (for instance, DataGrip), C row is browser windows, A1-2 is temporary, not often used windows, A3 is communication apps. I mostly use A3, B2-3 and C2-3. It’s all mapped in my head so I can instantly switch to whichever VD I need.
That’s impressive
Personally I never needed more than 5 desktops, and I don’t think I could remember what I put on more desktops
Haha that’s fair
Although it’s a habit thing. Most of these are fixed, I never switch them to a different position. So the only ones I have to remember is A1-2 if I am using them, the rest is as easy as knowing where your glasses are stored in your cupboards.
Grid VDs club. Although I only use 2x2 because toggle up/down/righ/left is complicated enough for my brain.
Maybe a cross setup would work for you if you ever need a 5th VD :)
Exactly, this is why the most ‘important’ person just uses a phone they are the most efficient with the smallest screen
It’s the same thing. The workers work, management just makes sure the workers work.
The job of people around the CEO is primarily to make decisions. All this huge chain of managers is needed only to aggregate information so that the CEO can make an informed decision. This is how many large companies operate. I would even say that there is a direct correlation between the size of the campaign and the number of monitors at the bottom.
The flip side of sitting behind a huge monitor is that you won’t stay outside with a huge number of your employees if you make the wrong decision. It’s just a different job.
Your description is basically of a “spherical CEO in a vacuum”, ie. the ideal and abstract version of how corporations should operate. It has very little to do with reality
Well, I can only write from my own experience. I’ve worked for several major campaigns in my life. In banks, in telecom operators. And it’s almost always been like this. And where there was none, the campaign collapsed. Not in a moment, of course, because campaigns, like people, do not die instantly, but age and degrade. But as a result, it was.
When you say campaign are you meaning company?
Yes. Sorry, I still don’t speak English well, so I use Google Translate.
No worries! I thought I understood, but I just wanted to check.
Have you worked with very many CEOs at SMEs? Based on my experience it seems to match the description, by and large.
I’ve been a C-suite executive, and I’ve worked with executives (incl. CEOs) at public companies.
Not only is there often a thermocline of truth that stops “bad” information going up the chain, CEOs more often than not make decisions based on nothing but their own opinions, and they will more than happily discard any information that doesn’t already fit that opinion, and even if negative things do manage to reach them from the other side of the thermocline, they often discount it or explain it away
Interesting, my experience has been quite different but then it has been more with executives of relatively small (<500) and private companies. I’ve also seen some cases of companies closer to dictatorships, but they have (at least from my external perspective) seemed like dictators with at least clear visions. A small minority have been loudmouthed assholes.
there is a direct correlation between the size of the campaign and the number of monitors at the bottom.
From my limited experience, it’s the size/amount of monitors at the top that correlates with company size, not at the bottom. At my 5-person software company, almost everyone works with multiple screens, except one of the three founders who still works mainly on a laptop display at least
Its almost as if the more real work you do, the less you matter.
I wonder what would happen if the higher up in a company you get, the less you got payed. I’d imagine more actual work would be accomplished.
The higher you go the closer you get to the people who actually controls the capital. The CEO can have a personal relationship with the board, people who do actual work are merely a number to the higher-ups.
The CEO is usually on the board and a lot of the other board members will also be CEOs but yes
It saddens me the fact that there are people out there wanting to do more work.
The game is rigged. Do nothing and get paid.
Agree with you but depends on where someone work. It’s rare but some work are undeniably positive to the society.
Have you been watching me at work?
I wouldn’t be in the field if I didn’t enjoy the work.
However I’ve positioned myself to make sure no work is ever unpaid, unless it’s for my own future startup idea.
Just had a conversation with someone on this last weekend. They’re what I call someone dependent on corporate daycare. They need to be working or they lack self value. Their boss is an ass, hardly works and this guy thinks he’s slacking at 12 hours a day (exaggerated only a little).
What are you doing that is so important? Is it saving someone’s life? Life changing cancer drugs? No no, it’s a PowerPoint that shows the progress on the projects of equally less important tasks that is only making your boss look good.
And the fucker still thinks he’s not WORKING HARD ENOUGH!!
Yeah it is truly sad. I wish with all my heart that I could have one of those government jobs where I would do the minimum and still get paid well, but sadly, I am stuck in the corporate world.
Thankfully, I just give them my 1% and do the Barr minimum to get the annual increments…but fuck I just hate wasting 8 hours of my life a day doing worthless computer shit. It pays the bills though.
deleted by creator
Perfecting the art of brown-nosing.
I have three monitors. FUCK.
I have eight. 🤡
Most monitors has got to be the security guard’s CCTV, so it does track!
Ok I just wana know your hardware setup. Not really the monitors but what you are doing for video output. Assuming either specialized cards with alot of dvi outputs(mini dvi?) or multiple gpus or even just dvi dasiychain?
I’m counting laptop screens as 1 and externals as 1.
3 laptops all with secondary monitors and two surface devices attached to my wall.
the surfaces are displaying system monitoring and portfolio details
laptop a is for job a
laptop b is for job b
laptop c is personal
They got you taking care of the cockroach problem in the basement?
And they took his stapler
I bring a portable screen from home, bringing me to a total of 4 with the laptop screen.
But I just like lots of monitors
Same. No wonder I’m burnt out. The human brain can only handle so many screens at the same time :/
I feel wrong.
I have an iPhone, and a laptop and 2 screens.
That’s four screens total. You’re first on the chopping block.
Fact is, in my company, higher ups have more screens than me. Like phone, desktop, couple monitors and huge wall monitor.
Maybe your company is a statistical outlier
Nah, actually, in a typical company the lower down the ranks you are the less likely you are to be fired, statistically speaking (to a point, of course you’re more likely to be fired while on probation or something).
This is true. CEOs generally last very short before they’re fired. Any normal person would be set for life by their compensation package, though.
Hello my brother/sister/velociraptor/etc in screens. We’re worthless together 💖
and yet… if it’s a company that’s a bit slack on security, the right command in the right place by someone with 2 monitors can kill the company dead.
A few well placed commands by a few lowly 2 monitor types are always the kind of things that derail companies on a fundamental level.
What senior management always forget is that they need us vastly more than we need them…
If all the two-monitor people get up and walk out, the company stops.
You can lose any other single rung there and still push on.
My spouse and I work for a contractor that is having trouble hiring experienced people like us, so they have been hiring fresh grads outta school. There is a limited pool of experience here, so when management throws a fit one of us is overloaded or gets sick and can’t meet the budget or deadline, it ends with nothing because they can’t afford to lose us. We work on the power grid and it’s a relatively small pool of engineers doing the work we do. Also, I’m rocking two work laptops with a home setup of 4 monitors and an office setup of 3, but still feel pretty important!
You should start poaching the gaming industry, it’s shedding developers like mad. Most of them are familiar with several stacks so pickup up new stuff is nbd.
Haha, those would be my kind of co-workers, but the kind of work we do requires a background and degree in electrical engineering and power systems. Although, I have been moving away from this in my career in the conventional sense. I want to do dev stuff and networking stuff, that’s where the fun is! They recently gave me an opportunity to help program and configure all the networking and automation equipment for a substation, been learning a lot and feeling like my tinkering with homelab stuff is finally paying off in some way lol.
Ohh, you’ll find degrees but not in power systems :). No wonder it’s hard to find hands.
Oh fuck, I have 5 27-32” monitors, phone, 2 laptops and a wall TV. Based on this I’m half fired already.
Why would anyone fire someone who works so much for so little?
That’s at least 9 separate jobs right there!
Are you sure you’re not a NOC?
Kinda reminds me this Game one plays in Theatre which is to Play The Status (you’re given a number between 1 and 10, with 1 having the lowest social status and 10 the highest, and you try and act as such a person).
Alongside the whole chin-down to chin-up thing, people tend to do more fast and confident moving the higher the status, but the reality is that whilst indeed up the scale in professional environment the higher the status the more busy and rushed they seem, the trully highest status people (the 10s) don’t at all rush: as I put it back then (this was the UK) “the Queen doesn’t rush because for everybody the right time for the Queen to be somewhere is when she’s there, even it it’s not actually so, hence she doesn’t need to rush”.
There was also some cartoon making the rounds many years ago about how people on a company looked depending on their social status, were you started with the unkept shabbily dressed homeless person that lived outside the vuilding, and as you went up the professional scale people got progressively more well dressed and into suits and such, and then all of a sudden a big switch, as the company owner at the top dressed as shabbily as the homeless person.
“Importance™”
deleted by creator
Which is to say that you could replace them with a see n say wearing a tie.
Mid manager replacement prompt
You are a mid level manager tasked with creating a McKinsey-style, action-led PowerPoint pack. The input is [insert source: report, transcript, dataset, notes, etc.]. Your task is to transform it into a concise, executive-ready presentation that drives decision-making. Follow these rules:
- Overall structure:
Title page (client/project context).
Executive summary (3–5 key takeaways, action-oriented).
Situation analysis (context, data, and insights).
Key findings (use MECE structure: Mutually Exclusive, Collectively Exhaustive).
Recommendations (clear, prioritized, action-led).
Implementation roadmap (phases, timeline, responsibilities).
Risks & mitigations.
Appendix (supporting detail, charts, data tables).
- Slide design principles:
Each slide has one clear message in the title (action-oriented, ‘so-what’ statement).
Use the pyramid principle (top-down storytelling: answer first, then supporting evidence).
Keep text minimal, favor charts, diagrams, and visuals.
Apply MECE logic to group insights.
Recommendations must be specific, actionable, and prioritized.
- Tone & Style:
Professional, concise, fact-based.
Focus on clarity and impact.
Avoid jargon unless essential.
Make it CEO-ready: every slide should be understandable in under 10 seconds.
Today just got an email to connect with McKinsey about something… My company likes to occasionally piss money away on McKinsey and it always just sucks…
Somebody in your company who used to work for Mckinsey is now in a position to spend money on Mckinsey. If they spend enough over a long period the they will be invited back to become partner.
Here is the expendability graph
📉
If the guy with the “don’t-turn-off”-server gets fired everyone know that the ship will sink
It’s funny when a big exec leaves and other execs are rushing to reassure us they are to to the challenge of dealing with such a key person departing…
We do not care at all. We have zero confidence in any of them and do not care about any of them
We didn’t have a CEO for half a year… What changed? Nothing…
Then we got a new CEO… His new policies caused loss of revenue so we had to fire 50 people…
Thank god for that save
Oh we were similarly “rudderless” when a major executive left.
Adding to the amusement of the constant panic of missing leadership, was when someone asked about simply promoting one of the interim executives to full time and just getting on with it. This was in a town hall with the CEO and the interim executive in question and in front of everyone the CEO said simply that the interim executive wasn’t competent enough to do the job.
Quite an effective way to destroy someone’s reputation and ego.
What a colleague! Haha!
Compensation is inversely proportional to productivity.
