There are several topics that I must admit to tiring of on HN, not because of any issue with the topic itself but the inevitable response it engenders. Any top

There are several topics that I must admit to tiring of on HN, not because of any issue with the topic itself but the inevitable response it engenders. Any topic about tech company hiring and interviewing invokes regurgitation of the same tired responses (probably by the same people) on both sides of whiteboard coding (as just one example). Remote working (as a topic) is the same. You get the same responses ("it works fine for me", "Being in an office is completely pointless", etc). The problem is a significant chunk of particularly the pro-remote work crowd has an axe to grind. Some just want to work remotely (which is fine) but then will often use anecdata and often dismiss any of the valid issues brought up by remote working (communication, culture, isolation, etc). It's interesting because this inability to separate one's personal desires with what's good for the whole is exactly how NIMBYism exists. This approach of deciding on a given outcome and thenc onstructing "reality" to support that view taken to extremes is incredibly dangerous. You don't have to look that far to see some frightening examples. Just this week we had Trump withdraw from the Iranian deal for pretty much no other reason than "Obama = bad" with basically zero evidence to support it. Hell the US started a war in Iraq because of this same construct-reality-to-match-your-beliefs view (then about WMDs). These obviously are extreme examples. I find the inability to have reasoned discourse to be disappointing with well-reasoned comments on this thread lambasted as "bullshit". Likewise you see the downvote-because-I-disagree-with-you attitude that I personally can't stand.