> After all, as long as the results are there, the time and place of work should be of little consequence, right? I am not sure I agree. My experience has been

> After all, as long as the results are there, the time and place of work should be of little consequence, right? I am not sure I agree. My experience has been that remote work requires greater discipline. Complex projects have twists and turns, many variables. One has to learn to over communicate to ensure that one is not building the wrong thing. This is harder to do over hangouts mainly because it is tougher to gauge interpersonal dynamics of a room. Coding is the easiest part of large scale projects. Harder problems are stakeholder management, ensuring we are building the right thing and ensuring that information flows freely. I am on a project that spans Boston, NY and Stockholm. We all know what we want to build. Yet, every two weeks or so, I find myself traveling. Mainly to ensure that we react fast as we learn more about unknowns. Are we all on the same page? This is sustainable for a company that can afford to depute a few people to do this. For a tiny startup that has to be agile enough to pivot immediately, it is harder to do so when all your handful of engineers are remote. Personally, I would hire someone remote if it was a very well defined chunk of work. At that point, I may as well hire a contractor. IMO, the value of an engineer is not just to write code, it is to solve business problems.