> The status update aspect of it could be automatized from the task management tooling, people reach out for help/input as needed and don't wait for the next stand up, socialize outside of these allocated slots, etc.
People rarely understand the point of agile and, specifically, standups. Using it as a daily check in, especially as status updates, is contrary to agile's intentions. The real purpose is to make sure that people on the team frequently expose problems. If people are already doing that consistently, then standup as a practice is fairly moot.
For me standup meetings are not a part of agile. The latter is more of a minset, how you go on about things. Everything else, standups, scrum boards, epics, story points, squads, retros etc. are just tools that might or might not be useful for a team. You can be agile without them, and you can not be agile with the entire array of buzzwords.
I think there is an useful status update component to standups. Not to your boss, to have a shared view among the team what the state of the product is. But this has to be aligned with how fast to product is meaningfully changing. Some times this might indeed be daily, but otherwise it quickly becomes just noise.
Of course some managers think the product has to or can meaningfully change every day.
I agree, that if you do them you should make them about exposing problems.
People rarely understand the point of agile and, specifically, standups. Using it as a daily check in, especially as status updates, is contrary to agile's intentions. The real purpose is to make sure that people on the team frequently expose problems. If people are already doing that consistently, then standup as a practice is fairly moot.