>It’s the same reason that communism does not work nearly as well as capitalism — things work best when you give people freedom as individual actors. You said

>It’s the same reason that communism does not work nearly as well as capitalism — things work best when you give people freedom as individual actors. You said "capitalism" but you meant "liberalism," and you said "communism" when you meant "authoritarian dictatorship." But setting aside this equally unnecessary and inaccurate argument, the whole tone of this article seems to glorify the archetype of the "110%" employee. I'm "passionate" about programming and computer science, but I also don't just want to pull up a JIRA and bang away code. Even if we accept the author's premise that open offices and social work environments are bad for productivity (which many people here have already pushed back against), I didn't try to find a job with lots of smart people so I could only interact with them via email. Sure, an open office occasionally distracts me and gets me out of the "flow," but it's almost always to help someone or join an interesting conversation. These things are valuable to me on their own, because (1) I like interesting conversations and (2) it means I can ask someone for help whenever I need it. And that's a better long-term feeling than slamming out code every day, which, by month two or three, starts to feel a little uninspiring.