5 ms·

You're exclusively focusing on the first generation of remote workers, which had already responded to an existing non-remote setup. A second or third generation

You're exclusively focusing on the first generation of remote workers, which had already responded to an existing non-remote setup. A second or third generation of reliable remote work would play an entirely different strategy which would create a much different ecosystem. Either way, it is irrelevant. The gravity of "work here"ism is much higher than the agency of the workers. > If anything, tech's resistance of remote work is the struggle to preserve America's last community: the workplace. That's overly charitable on several accounts. Tech, or any mega corp, can't have such an intention while being a machine that merely responds to a single ultimate parameter that is profit, in some shape or form. The fact that people could have a simulation of a community in the workplace is an externality they will tolerate, as long as HR is happy. > Friendships born in the workplace are a staple of urban life, it's one of the few places left where you can regularly and guaranteedly meet with people. How many of your workplace friends do you think would let you stay over for months should you find yourself homeless? Lend you $20K if need hits? Take care of you while sick? Be at your funeral? And vice versa? Most of those folks we can make at a workplace are affiliates, acquaintances, not friends.

themacguffinman 5y ago
Does a second generation remote work ecosystem/strategy suddenly restore a social community of people you consistently spend 8 hours a day collaborating with? The only difference between first and second gen workers is that second/third gen might be more likely to be born in some random place because first gen wanted low CoL. Is hanging out with highschool buddies forever because in remote world you never leave your hometown supposed to be the replacement for second/third gen remote workers? > Tech, or any mega corp, can't have such an intention I don't care what corporations' intentions are, I think the reality is that this is America's last community that remote work will destroy and the tech industry is struggling against it. > Most of those folks we can make at a workplace are affiliates, acquaintances, not friends. Most of everyone I meet won't be such close friends. The workplace is one of the few guaranteed places left for adults to consistently meet people who they didn't just grow up with. If the worst indictment of workplace friends is that most of them won't lend me $20k, well, I'll just have to live with that. I'll have to remove our social interactions from the record because they don't meet the required level of friendship.
- acituan 5y ago
  > Is hanging out with highschool buddies forever because in remote world you never leave your hometown supposed to be the replacement for second/third gen remote workers? That would be an example of not being surrounded by strangers. Mind you a good chunk of tech is made of immigrants from countries where a neighborhood wouldn’t be reduced to high school buddies; would include (extended) family, neighborhood with its other constituents. The default choice of not leaving the locale one is raised up in, especially if one could make the same salary remotely, wouldn’t be a stretch. > I don't care what corporations' intentions are, I think the reality is that this is America's last community that remote work will destroy and the tech industry is struggling against it. I do because it is an ersatz community born out of luck constrained by its makers. It is almost an in-flesh version of all-you-can-watch crap, in the sense of giving false satisfaction to real needs. > Most of everyone I meet won't be such close friends. It would be absurd if you did. You’d only need a few, but unlikely to make any in a city of strangers. > If the worst indictment of workplace friends is that most of them won't lend me $20k, well, I'll just have to live with that. Worst indictment is to make you think the sense of social interaction with those people can make up for a complete absence of real friends, an absence brought upon by the necessity of being near that workplace. > I'll have to remove our social interactions from the record because they don't meet the required level of friendship Again this is an absurd strawman. No one is telling you to only interact with friends. I am merely saying if you think your workplace acquaintances make real friends, you’re more likely to be deceiving yourself than not.
  - themacguffinman 5y ago
    > The default choice of not leaving the locale one is raised up in, especially if one could make the same salary remotely, wouldn’t be a stretch. Wonderful, instead of having to go to a city where people of all kinds mix together with ambition and purpose, it's so much better for people to just stay where they grew up and stick to people who just happen to be born near them. That's a great slogan for lonely people: don't reach out of your comfort zone for people you'll love, just never move and you won't have to deal with unfamiliar people. I apologize for being so sarcastic, I thought it'd be slightly funnier than drily expressing how ridiculously dystopian I think that is. > it is an ersatz community born out of luck No more luck-based than randomly being born in a geographical area. At least there's a non-zero amount of choice and purpose involved in travelling to a city. > a complete absence of real friends, an absence brought upon by the necessity of being near that workplace. It's been necessary to be near your workplace for a very long time, even before the industrial revolution. Such a causal link doesn't match up with any history I'm aware of. > I am merely saying if you think your workplace acquaintances make real friends, you’re more likely to be deceiving yourself than not. I didn't say that workplace acquaintances make real friends. I did say that workplaces are reliable communities that you can discover new people and make real friends in. Also, workplace acquaintances are good sources of socialization on their own when it comes to loneliness. I don't have to deceive myself to find great social value in such a professional and ambitious melting pot of people from all over the world. Should I be happy to be relieved of that opportunity? For what, the opportunity to never leave my birthplace (assuming I'm "second gen")? > especially if one could make the same salary remotely Okay you were the one telling me that corporations are solely focused on profits.

themacguffinman 5y ago

Does a second generation remote work ecosystem/strategy suddenly restore a social community of people you consistently spend 8 hours a day collaborating with? The only difference between first and second gen workers is that second/third gen might be more likely to be born in some random place because first gen wanted low CoL. Is hanging out with highschool buddies forever because in remote world you never leave your hometown supposed to be the replacement for second/third gen remote workers? > Tech, or any mega corp, can't have such an intention I don't care what corporations' intentions are, I think the reality is that this is America's last community that remote work will destroy and the tech industry is struggling against it. > Most of those folks we can make at a workplace are affiliates, acquaintances, not friends. Most of everyone I meet won't be such close friends. The workplace is one of the few guaranteed places left for adults to consistently meet people who they didn't just grow up with. If the worst indictment of workplace friends is that most of them won't lend me $20k, well, I'll just have to live with that. I'll have to remove our social interactions from the record because they don't meet the required level of friendship.

acituan 5y ago
> Is hanging out with highschool buddies forever because in remote world you never leave your hometown supposed to be the replacement for second/third gen remote workers? That would be an example of not being surrounded by strangers. Mind you a good chunk of tech is made of immigrants from countries where a neighborhood wouldn’t be reduced to high school buddies; would include (extended) family, neighborhood with its other constituents. The default choice of not leaving the locale one is raised up in, especially if one could make the same salary remotely, wouldn’t be a stretch. > I don't care what corporations' intentions are, I think the reality is that this is America's last community that remote work will destroy and the tech industry is struggling against it. I do because it is an ersatz community born out of luck constrained by its makers. It is almost an in-flesh version of all-you-can-watch crap, in the sense of giving false satisfaction to real needs. > Most of everyone I meet won't be such close friends. It would be absurd if you did. You’d only need a few, but unlikely to make any in a city of strangers. > If the worst indictment of workplace friends is that most of them won't lend me $20k, well, I'll just have to live with that. Worst indictment is to make you think the sense of social interaction with those people can make up for a complete absence of real friends, an absence brought upon by the necessity of being near that workplace. > I'll have to remove our social interactions from the record because they don't meet the required level of friendship Again this is an absurd strawman. No one is telling you to only interact with friends. I am merely saying if you think your workplace acquaintances make real friends, you’re more likely to be deceiving yourself than not.
- themacguffinman 5y ago
  > The default choice of not leaving the locale one is raised up in, especially if one could make the same salary remotely, wouldn’t be a stretch. Wonderful, instead of having to go to a city where people of all kinds mix together with ambition and purpose, it's so much better for people to just stay where they grew up and stick to people who just happen to be born near them. That's a great slogan for lonely people: don't reach out of your comfort zone for people you'll love, just never move and you won't have to deal with unfamiliar people. I apologize for being so sarcastic, I thought it'd be slightly funnier than drily expressing how ridiculously dystopian I think that is. > it is an ersatz community born out of luck No more luck-based than randomly being born in a geographical area. At least there's a non-zero amount of choice and purpose involved in travelling to a city. > a complete absence of real friends, an absence brought upon by the necessity of being near that workplace. It's been necessary to be near your workplace for a very long time, even before the industrial revolution. Such a causal link doesn't match up with any history I'm aware of. > I am merely saying if you think your workplace acquaintances make real friends, you’re more likely to be deceiving yourself than not. I didn't say that workplace acquaintances make real friends. I did say that workplaces are reliable communities that you can discover new people and make real friends in. Also, workplace acquaintances are good sources of socialization on their own when it comes to loneliness. I don't have to deceive myself to find great social value in such a professional and ambitious melting pot of people from all over the world. Should I be happy to be relieved of that opportunity? For what, the opportunity to never leave my birthplace (assuming I'm "second gen")? > especially if one could make the same salary remotely Okay you were the one telling me that corporations are solely focused on profits.