this post was submitted on 09 Jun 2026
431 points (96.5% liked)

Showerthoughts

42410 readers
550 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.

Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. No politics
    • If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
    • A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS

If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.

Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Not only does this disincentivize HR from running fake vacancies or stringing multiple candidates on just to keep their options open, but it also solves the problem of unemployed people job-searching effectively working full-time for free. The fact that companies would have to pay to hire workers would mean they try to make the selection as short and effective as possible.

Edit: From the business POV:

  • Businesses would have a limited budget for hiring so would limit process to 10 applicants and would have to pick those randomly. Less time spent on interviewing but also might miss the ideal candidate. Although the difference would fall sharply with larger pools.
  • And 000s of people now stuck wo any appls at all (although better than writing fake, futile appls), and no money. Not enough jobs on the market would translate into not enough paying applications for them to be able to substitute unemployment benefits.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] vk6flab@lemmy.radio 18 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

This sounds viable until you consider what the application process will devolve into.

The initial screening process will become even more annoying which will cause more bot applications and in return it will get even more annoying.

We have a massive government mandate that requires that you apply for a large number of jobs in order to qualify for unemployment benefits.

We have job agencies who are incentivised to place candidates, any candidates, with no penalties for incorrect placement.

We have unpaid internships that normalise free work for hire in the most susceptible population, job entrants.

We have automated processes run by HR to weed out unsuitable applicants before the actual employer sees anything.

We have technically unqualified HR departments demanding qualifications for things that don't exist without any controls by the actual employer.

This idea won't address any of this, and I think it will make things worse.

E: spelling

[–] arrow74@lemmy.zip 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Easy solution. The company is allowed 1 free 30 minute phone call to both verify basic resume details and to schedule a lengthy interview.

Takes care of the bot issue, and a 30 minute phone call is less of a burden on the applicant

[–] SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 days ago

Thank you, this is the kind of scrutiny I was hoping for