4 ms·

>The "benefits" are primarily "collaboration" I haven't seen a lot of empirical work on this. Loooooooots of hand-waving by those who try to justify in-office

>The "benefits" are primarily "collaboration" I haven't seen a lot of empirical work on this. Loooooooots of hand-waving by those who try to justify in-office work, though. Not much consideration about the opportunity costs and tradeoffs though.

johnnymorgan 4y ago
We are only really missing some positional audio tools for remote collab to just wreck that argument and put it to bed. The ability to break off and sidebar convos is about the only piece I miss with in person.
- solarkraft 4y ago
  > The ability to break off and sidebar convos is about the only piece I miss with in person. I agree! Weird that it's still largely unsolved (there are some experimental apps like Chatmosphere or WorkAdventure, but nothing people actually use at scale). Other than that, collaboration is perfectly fine or better than in person. Looking at and interacting with the same screen is a good bit more comfortable [with MS Teams] than in person. VSCode liveshare is better than sitting in front of the same computer. There are so many small things you can do remotely you can't do in person.
perrygeo 4y ago
The ability to read social cues in person is so vital to our survival that they are instinctual - babies can pick on these cues without any prior exposure. Yet remote workers are struggling with these very things. That should disturb anyone and hint that the burden of proof goes the other way - we need to prove that virtual-everything relationships don't have a negative impact on society before we go all-in on it for a generation.
- p0pcult 4y ago
  >Yet remote workers are struggling with these very things. According to whom? The real estate partner who wrote this article? >before we go all-in on it for a generation. Who is suggesting going all-in on virtual-everything?

4 ms·

>The "benefits" are primarily "collaboration" I haven't seen a lot of empirical work on this. Loooooooots of hand-waving by those who try to justify in-office

by p0pcult 4y ago

johnnymorgan 4y ago
We are only really missing some positional audio tools for remote collab to just wreck that argument and put it to bed. The ability to break off and sidebar convos is about the only piece I miss with in person.
- solarkraft 4y ago
  > The ability to break off and sidebar convos is about the only piece I miss with in person. I agree! Weird that it's still largely unsolved (there are some experimental apps like Chatmosphere or WorkAdventure, but nothing people actually use at scale). Other than that, collaboration is perfectly fine or better than in person. Looking at and interacting with the same screen is a good bit more comfortable [with MS Teams] than in person. VSCode liveshare is better than sitting in front of the same computer. There are so many small things you can do remotely you can't do in person.
perrygeo 4y ago
The ability to read social cues in person is so vital to our survival that they are instinctual - babies can pick on these cues without any prior exposure. Yet remote workers are struggling with these very things. That should disturb anyone and hint that the burden of proof goes the other way - we need to prove that virtual-everything relationships don't have a negative impact on society before we go all-in on it for a generation.
- p0pcult 4y ago
  >Yet remote workers are struggling with these very things. According to whom? The real estate partner who wrote this article? >before we go all-in on it for a generation. Who is suggesting going all-in on virtual-everything?