5 ms·

We are not going back. There is a huge demand for IT people. And we all learn and know we can do it remotely as we are doing for almost 2 years. I do get som

We are not going back. There is a huge demand for IT people. And we all learn and know we can do it remotely as we are doing for almost 2 years. I do get some people Want to go to the Office. But the majority of tech scene is Introvert. We are not going back. We have better machines, espresso, coffee food and gym at our own house. Now we are "saving the climate" not doing commute. It works both ways /s

lowkey 5y ago
> Now we are "saving the climate" not doing commute. It works both ways /s I’m not sure why the /s as this is a legitimate argument in favor of WFH. It is objectively better for the environment and reduces climate-impact so governments and corporations who have been green-washing should be embracing the new reality. Instead we get unsubstantiated claims of better water-cooler conversations driving innovation and other baseless claims.
- albatross13 5y ago
  jinx
- prepend 5y ago
  I think the /s is because the reason isn’t saving the climate but is presented as the reason as it’s virtuous and hard to argue against.
  - Apocryphon 5y ago
    Calling out (tech) corporate hypocrisy will never get old https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8C5sjjhsso https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8C5sjjhsso
  - lowkey 5y ago
    I see now. That makes sense. It is similar to how the anti-Bitcoin crowd in HN constantly smear Bitcoin as an environmental disaster while ignoring facts like: - 100% of gold is strip mined literally raping the planet and leaving the mined earth completely unusable, while polluting water supplies. - The primary alternative to Bitcoin is the US Petrodollar system which relies on proof of violence backed by the most powerful military industrial complex in the history of the world to ‘liberate’ oil-rich nations who dare trade oil for anything other than USD. (See Iraq, Iran, Libya, etc.) - Gladly ignore things like Blood diamonds, the environmental and social costs of mining Lithium and other rare earth elements used to build the so-called green economy. - Bitcoin uses mostly clean energy and increasingly so over time thanks to incentives while Gold, Platinum, Copper, etc are never held to the same ESG standards. - Bitcoin gets demonized for its energy consumption while using half the energy of YouTube, an ad-infested spyware-ridden cat video site and less energy than the world’s hair-dryers /s Edit: downvotes but no comments, sad.
    - reedjosh 5y ago
      Lol, love your irrelevant rant. Totally agree with it 100% btw. ESG is just corporate/banker control disguised as rainbows and sunshine. Gotta love the doublespeak Orwellian world we're in. While your rant was a bit off topic, it would still be fun to see the arguments. But no, you'll just be down voted.
    - xiphias2 5y ago
      Don't be sad for being downvoted. Just buy and HODL. As Peter Thiel asks: “What important truth do very few people agree with you on?” Bitcoin's adoption is about 0.5% right now. By the time most people will agree with you it will have to be over 50% (about 7 doublings, which is 7 years), and Bitcoin won't be as great investment anymore as it is now.
- woodruffw 5y ago
  > I’m not sure why the /s as this is a legitimate argument in favor of WFH. I suspect that there's significant variation here: widespread WFH means fewer people driving ~1.5 hours a day to their office park jobs, but it also means fewer people taking public transit to urban centers. The former is an ecological disaster; the latter is probably slightly better than the same number of people air conditioning, etc. their independent houses and apartments.
albatross13 5y ago
Honestly the reduction in carbon emissions is a huge one, imo. I'm surprised more companies aren't championing that as a reason, by itself, to downsize office space and let people work from home.
- rorykoehler 5y ago
  Governments could rezone business districts to residential mixed use too and solve our ridiculous housing shortage issues.
  - foxpurple 5y ago
    Would also save the city cafes and restaurants. Offices are doomed but hopefully cities are not.
- superflit 5y ago
  Because it never was about "saving climate" it was only for a way to big corp deduct taxes and then tax YOU to pay the bill. Strange that our "carbon free" companies are getting crazy about coming back and even more crazy now because nobody wants to go back to the cage. Sorry but no. I want to live where I want to live and I will work same or more efficient than I did before WFH. No that cold free sandwich will not do it
rolleiflex 5y ago
I laughed at espresso, I’m glad that has been a shared experience. I spent around $2k on coffee equipment since the start of the pandemic. No way I’m going to go back and drink sad office coffee or deal with poorly maintained espresso machines in micro kitchens now.
- foxpurple 5y ago
  I spent $700 on the breville machine and it makes far better coffee than the $2000 fully automatic machine at work that has to be disassembled almost daily to avoid mould build up which no one does. When back at the office I’m drinking tea only.
  - rolleiflex 5y ago
    I spent about $750 on a Rancilio Silvia, about $550 on a DF64 espresso grinder and some several hundred here and there for other small equipment at $20-30 apiece. I then paid about $750 or so to a coffee roasting machine, and I started to regularly roast my own coffee. Put in about $200 for books on roasting, and I’m now fully vertically integrated, ready to forcibly take over a small Caribbean nation to plant my flag and start my first coffee plantation under the auspices of the West India Company.
- aeharding 5y ago
  There's definitely amenities at home that seem simple but seriously factor into my preference to WFH. For example, a Toto washlet. I visited Japan in Feb 2020 and purchased a bidet promptly afterwards, along with starting WFH at the onset of the lockdowns. After more than a year, it's hard to imagine going back. :-)
  - rolleiflex 5y ago
    I’ve bought a clone of Toto Washlet for a few hundred bucks on Amazon when I saw the writing on the wall for toilet paper shortages. It worked great for reducing my toilet paper use to 1/10 of what it was, and it’s objectively more hygienic to boot. Surely enough, one of the first few things to become scarce after the toilet paper was the washlets.
coryrc 5y ago
Over 80% of my team wants to return. Dunno man, I don't get it.
- achow 5y ago
  Most of young & single are going mad in home isolation. They want to come back for social connect, better worksrations, free convenient food and many such..
drewcoo 5y ago
Why do the extroverts want to go back? Why would they rather spend time harassing introverts instead of spending more time at a coffeeshop or a gym or wherever other extroverts go?
- superflit 5y ago
  Because vampires need blood?
throwaway98797 5y ago
if facetime matters those who go back will get raises. those who stay wont. over time in non-remote first companies the facers will out compete the WFH crowd. queue articles on nytimes on pay discrimination for those who WFH.
- superflit 5y ago
  That is false. We all know the best way to get raises is to switch companies. No switching means you will get maybe 5-8%

lowkey 5y ago

> Now we are "saving the climate" not doing commute. It works both ways /s I’m not sure why the /s as this is a legitimate argument in favor of WFH. It is objectively better for the environment and reduces climate-impact so governments and corporations who have been green-washing should be embracing the new reality. Instead we get unsubstantiated claims of better water-cooler conversations driving innovation and other baseless claims.

albatross13 5y ago
jinx
prepend 5y ago
I think the /s is because the reason isn’t saving the climate but is presented as the reason as it’s virtuous and hard to argue against.
- Apocryphon 5y ago
  Calling out (tech) corporate hypocrisy will never get old https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8C5sjjhsso https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8C5sjjhsso
- lowkey 5y ago
  I see now. That makes sense. It is similar to how the anti-Bitcoin crowd in HN constantly smear Bitcoin as an environmental disaster while ignoring facts like: - 100% of gold is strip mined literally raping the planet and leaving the mined earth completely unusable, while polluting water supplies. - The primary alternative to Bitcoin is the US Petrodollar system which relies on proof of violence backed by the most powerful military industrial complex in the history of the world to ‘liberate’ oil-rich nations who dare trade oil for anything other than USD. (See Iraq, Iran, Libya, etc.) - Gladly ignore things like Blood diamonds, the environmental and social costs of mining Lithium and other rare earth elements used to build the so-called green economy. - Bitcoin uses mostly clean energy and increasingly so over time thanks to incentives while Gold, Platinum, Copper, etc are never held to the same ESG standards. - Bitcoin gets demonized for its energy consumption while using half the energy of YouTube, an ad-infested spyware-ridden cat video site and less energy than the world’s hair-dryers /s Edit: downvotes but no comments, sad.
  - reedjosh 5y ago
    Lol, love your irrelevant rant. Totally agree with it 100% btw. ESG is just corporate/banker control disguised as rainbows and sunshine. Gotta love the doublespeak Orwellian world we're in. While your rant was a bit off topic, it would still be fun to see the arguments. But no, you'll just be down voted.
  - xiphias2 5y ago
    Don't be sad for being downvoted. Just buy and HODL. As Peter Thiel asks: “What important truth do very few people agree with you on?” Bitcoin's adoption is about 0.5% right now. By the time most people will agree with you it will have to be over 50% (about 7 doublings, which is 7 years), and Bitcoin won't be as great investment anymore as it is now.
woodruffw 5y ago
> I’m not sure why the /s as this is a legitimate argument in favor of WFH. I suspect that there's significant variation here: widespread WFH means fewer people driving ~1.5 hours a day to their office park jobs, but it also means fewer people taking public transit to urban centers. The former is an ecological disaster; the latter is probably slightly better than the same number of people air conditioning, etc. their independent houses and apartments.

albatross13 5y ago

Honestly the reduction in carbon emissions is a huge one, imo. I'm surprised more companies aren't championing that as a reason, by itself, to downsize office space and let people work from home.

rorykoehler 5y ago
Governments could rezone business districts to residential mixed use too and solve our ridiculous housing shortage issues.
- foxpurple 5y ago
  Would also save the city cafes and restaurants. Offices are doomed but hopefully cities are not.
superflit 5y ago
Because it never was about "saving climate" it was only for a way to big corp deduct taxes and then tax YOU to pay the bill. Strange that our "carbon free" companies are getting crazy about coming back and even more crazy now because nobody wants to go back to the cage. Sorry but no. I want to live where I want to live and I will work same or more efficient than I did before WFH. No that cold free sandwich will not do it

rolleiflex 5y ago

I laughed at espresso, I’m glad that has been a shared experience. I spent around $2k on coffee equipment since the start of the pandemic. No way I’m going to go back and drink sad office coffee or deal with poorly maintained espresso machines in micro kitchens now.

foxpurple 5y ago
I spent $700 on the breville machine and it makes far better coffee than the $2000 fully automatic machine at work that has to be disassembled almost daily to avoid mould build up which no one does. When back at the office I’m drinking tea only.
- rolleiflex 5y ago
  I spent about $750 on a Rancilio Silvia, about $550 on a DF64 espresso grinder and some several hundred here and there for other small equipment at $20-30 apiece. I then paid about $750 or so to a coffee roasting machine, and I started to regularly roast my own coffee. Put in about $200 for books on roasting, and I’m now fully vertically integrated, ready to forcibly take over a small Caribbean nation to plant my flag and start my first coffee plantation under the auspices of the West India Company.
aeharding 5y ago
There's definitely amenities at home that seem simple but seriously factor into my preference to WFH. For example, a Toto washlet. I visited Japan in Feb 2020 and purchased a bidet promptly afterwards, along with starting WFH at the onset of the lockdowns. After more than a year, it's hard to imagine going back. :-)
- rolleiflex 5y ago
  I’ve bought a clone of Toto Washlet for a few hundred bucks on Amazon when I saw the writing on the wall for toilet paper shortages. It worked great for reducing my toilet paper use to 1/10 of what it was, and it’s objectively more hygienic to boot. Surely enough, one of the first few things to become scarce after the toilet paper was the washlets.

coryrc 5y ago

Over 80% of my team wants to return. Dunno man, I don't get it.

achow 5y ago
Most of young & single are going mad in home isolation. They want to come back for social connect, better worksrations, free convenient food and many such..

drewcoo 5y ago

Why do the extroverts want to go back? Why would they rather spend time harassing introverts instead of spending more time at a coffeeshop or a gym or wherever other extroverts go?

superflit 5y ago
Because vampires need blood?

throwaway98797 5y ago

if facetime matters those who go back will get raises. those who stay wont. over time in non-remote first companies the facers will out compete the WFH crowd. queue articles on nytimes on pay discrimination for those who WFH.

superflit 5y ago
That is false. We all know the best way to get raises is to switch companies. No switching means you will get maybe 5-8%