4 ms·

I find it fascinating that human society can spend so much time and money trying to optimize the current state (highway, roads, public transport, etc) when the

by epa 9y ago

I find it fascinating that human society can spend so much time and money trying to optimize the current state (highway, roads, public transport, etc) when the root cause of the issue (having to work on-site, or in a city) seems like such an easier issue to solve. SF Bay area is a leader in this work-from-home/remote revolution, but what external factors will tip the masses to be able to migrate?

adventured 9y ago
> when the root cause of the issue (having to work on-site, or in a city) seems like such an easier issue to solve. That's not actually easier to solve. Only theoretically and only if your theory involves only robots and is specific to a dozen cities. Study after study keeps proving most people like working physically with other people. The majority would prefer to not telecommute. It also keeps getting proven that most people perform their jobs much better on location rather than telecommuting. Amazing things happen from physical human interaction that do not happen telecommuting. Bell Labs and Xerox PARC would never happen via telecommuting. These things are not true for everyone, they're simply true for most. Beyond that, it's a small minority in the US that has a housing cost problem. Overwhelmingly the US is the land of inexpensive housing compared to other nations with comparable median incomes.
- gorkonsine 9y ago
  > Bell Labs and Xerox PARC would never happen via telecommuting. I'll bet Bell Labs and Xerox PARC didn't have modern open-plan office spaces. When the choices are telecommuting or open-plan offices, telecommuting is clearly the better option.
- MarkMc 9y ago
  You are right to say that working on location is generally much more productive than working remotely. And it will likely stay that way for the next decade or two, so it makes sense to continue developing commute-to-work infrastructure for now. But I wonder about the longer term. In 30 or 40 years we will have virtual reality systems that can almost perfectly fool our senses into believing a remote colleague is in fact sitting in the same room. Will most people still commute to work?

by epa 9y ago

adventured 9y ago

> when the root cause of the issue (having to work on-site, or in a city) seems like such an easier issue to solve. That's not actually easier to solve. Only theoretically and only if your theory involves only robots and is specific to a dozen cities. Study after study keeps proving most people like working physically with other people. The majority would prefer to not telecommute. It also keeps getting proven that most people perform their jobs much better on location rather than telecommuting. Amazing things happen from physical human interaction that do not happen telecommuting. Bell Labs and Xerox PARC would never happen via telecommuting. These things are not true for everyone, they're simply true for most. Beyond that, it's a small minority in the US that has a housing cost problem. Overwhelmingly the US is the land of inexpensive housing compared to other nations with comparable median incomes.

gorkonsine 9y ago
> Bell Labs and Xerox PARC would never happen via telecommuting. I'll bet Bell Labs and Xerox PARC didn't have modern open-plan office spaces. When the choices are telecommuting or open-plan offices, telecommuting is clearly the better option.
MarkMc 9y ago
You are right to say that working on location is generally much more productive than working remotely. And it will likely stay that way for the next decade or two, so it makes sense to continue developing commute-to-work infrastructure for now. But I wonder about the longer term. In 30 or 40 years we will have virtual reality systems that can almost perfectly fool our senses into believing a remote colleague is in fact sitting in the same room. Will most people still commute to work?