4 ms·

One thing to recognize is that people who moved to SV for work, pretty much by definition, put career ahead of friends, community, and likely family. So it sho

One thing to recognize is that people who moved to SV for work, pretty much by definition, put career ahead of friends, community, and likely family. So it shouldn't be surprising that many of them will not like remote work if the whole reason they moved is nullified. I feel lucky to have been born and raised in SV. I can have my cake and eat it too - remote work, in person work, whatever - and I can still go out and have lunch with friends I've had for 30+ years.

gumby 4y ago
> One thing to recognize is that people who moved ... for work, pretty much by definition, put career ahead of friends, community, and likely family. That's a broad and unfair generalization and implication. People decide to move for all sorts of reasons, and then perhaps a job determines a destination. People who move to a cheaper location (which can be young people starting a family or retirees or any life stage in between) are also putting cost or quality of life "ahead of friends, community, and likely family." If you are a person who makes friends you will make friends in your new community. Ubiquitous networking lets you keep in touch to the level you wish with friends and family. When I go back to my home country I see friends with whom we just pick up mid-conversation as if I'd just been over their home the day before. Life has been so for thousands of years. Not necessarily a sacrifice as you frame it.
- ghaff 4y ago
  It's a generalization but I'm not sure it's really unfair. I'm pretty sure that most people moving to SV/SF or most high cost areas really do so because they (or their partner) got a good job offer there, and especially in the case of tech and northern California, because there's a high density of other job possibilities as well. People do just decide they want to move someplace but I doubt a lot choose the Bay area unless there's a job offer attached.
  - almost_usual 4y ago
    The Bay Area offers great weather and nature. More people would live here if it weren’t so expensive.
    - ghaff 4y ago
      And more people (probably different people) would live in Manhattan if it weren't so expensive. But they are expensive so people tend not to move to them absent a well-paying job.
torben-friis 4y ago
> One thing to recognize is that people who moved to SV for work, pretty much by definition, put career ahead of friends, community, and likely family. So it shouldn't be surprising that many of them will not like remote work if the whole reason they moved is nullified. Shouldn’t they be happy that they can have their cake and eat it now? Move back closer to those friends and family and keep working your dream job!
- almost_usual 4y ago
  I think a lot of younger people want the tech boom at the beginning of the 2010s they missed out on. Tech was still ‘cool’ and the energy in SV/SF was high. That era is over, honestly it started ebbing in 2017.
- benatkin 4y ago
  Except there is the RTO crowd and the WFH crowd might have to defend WFH. Hence all these comments. I personally prefer WFH but think WFH is secure and don't want to unnecessarily hurt RTO but I'm not sure I'm right.

gumby 4y ago

> One thing to recognize is that people who moved ... for work, pretty much by definition, put career ahead of friends, community, and likely family. That's a broad and unfair generalization and implication. People decide to move for all sorts of reasons, and then perhaps a job determines a destination. People who move to a cheaper location (which can be young people starting a family or retirees or any life stage in between) are also putting cost or quality of life "ahead of friends, community, and likely family." If you are a person who makes friends you will make friends in your new community. Ubiquitous networking lets you keep in touch to the level you wish with friends and family. When I go back to my home country I see friends with whom we just pick up mid-conversation as if I'd just been over their home the day before. Life has been so for thousands of years. Not necessarily a sacrifice as you frame it.

ghaff 4y ago
It's a generalization but I'm not sure it's really unfair. I'm pretty sure that most people moving to SV/SF or most high cost areas really do so because they (or their partner) got a good job offer there, and especially in the case of tech and northern California, because there's a high density of other job possibilities as well. People do just decide they want to move someplace but I doubt a lot choose the Bay area unless there's a job offer attached.
- almost_usual 4y ago
  The Bay Area offers great weather and nature. More people would live here if it weren’t so expensive.
  - ghaff 4y ago
    And more people (probably different people) would live in Manhattan if it weren't so expensive. But they are expensive so people tend not to move to them absent a well-paying job.

torben-friis 4y ago

> One thing to recognize is that people who moved to SV for work, pretty much by definition, put career ahead of friends, community, and likely family. So it shouldn't be surprising that many of them will not like remote work if the whole reason they moved is nullified. Shouldn’t they be happy that they can have their cake and eat it now? Move back closer to those friends and family and keep working your dream job!

almost_usual 4y ago
I think a lot of younger people want the tech boom at the beginning of the 2010s they missed out on. Tech was still ‘cool’ and the energy in SV/SF was high. That era is over, honestly it started ebbing in 2017.
benatkin 4y ago
Except there is the RTO crowd and the WFH crowd might have to defend WFH. Hence all these comments. I personally prefer WFH but think WFH is secure and don't want to unnecessarily hurt RTO but I'm not sure I'm right.