> No, they won't, that's my point. Then you're missing my point: if the Kansas dev costs as much as the SF one, why not just recentralize in SF? It's pretty cl

> No, they won't, that's my point. Then you're missing my point: if the Kansas dev costs as much as the SF one, why not just recentralize in SF? It's pretty clear that facebook believes that remote workers are somewhat less efficient. Maybe that cost is worth it at a 10% discount on labor, but maybe it isn't on 3% less. >Or, in economics terms, both SF and Kansas workers are substitutable goods Yes, in isolation, one SF worker and one Kansas worker are substitutable. But 1000 SF workers and 1000 distributed workers aren't. Or in other words, once you have 500 SF workers, the marginal value of an SF worker is > than a Kansas worker, even if the worker in question is the same human being in two different locations.