3 ms·

As someone who thinks WFH is cancerous, this sounds excellent. I live about 15 minutes cycle from most jobs in my city. So according to your rule, I can work a

by throwaway22032 4y ago

As someone who thinks WFH is cancerous, this sounds excellent. I live about 15 minutes cycle from most jobs in my city. So according to your rule, I can work almost a full 8-hour day, whereas people who prefer to live in the middle of nowhere can only work 4-6 hours. I wonder who's going to get hired.

unshavedyak 4y ago
I imagine the 15min commute (by bike! lol) is why you enjoy it. Commute was always my driving force for hating in-office. These days i want land, some chicken, a few goat, etc. By your assertion i would likely have to find a new career, because there's basically no way i can afford 5-10acre and have a sane commute. But i've been WFH for coming on 10 years now. I don't judge office people, but if i can help it i'm done spending 3h of my day commuting on I5 every time there's a wreck (which happens easily 3 times a week in my area, ugh).
Mountain_Skies 4y ago
>As someone who thinks WFH is cancerous A bit provocative, don't you think?
- throwaway22032 4y ago
  I think that it's negative to society but that it has enough short-term desire behind it that absence of intervention it'll continue growing. Virtual interactions will replace physical interactions as time goes on because there are all of the right pressures there. For example, basically every conference now has the lazy backstop of "just go virtual". Venue fell through? Never mind reducing the size and trying to find somewhere else, just go online because then you can pretend it's not cancelled in all but name. Cancerous is a pretty accurate term for it, I think. It'll kill what it means to be human. Already has in my career, hence me leaving.
- gumballindie 4y ago
  They probably mean there’s little to no cure for it, so wfh is likely to stay.
dickersnoodle 4y ago
> As someone who thinks WFH is cancerous, this sounds excellent. Found the middle manager who's invested in commercial real estate... B-)
- slipshady 4y ago
  I think WFH is cancerous too, I'm an engineer with no real estate investments.
  - kkfx 4y ago
    Allow me to be rude: humans are social animals BUT the way we socialize have evolved all the time. In the present world just phones have deeply changed the socialization and social rules, mobile phones have deeply changed humanity again. WFH is definitively not so new, but it's application at a certain scale is. Offices are not new, but in the modern sense are a relatively new thing in historic terms. Thinking they are here to stay forever is not different than thinking carriage and horses would be a logistic tool forever, stearic candles a way to light up homes forever etc. WFH now have some issue, MUCH of them due to the crappy ignorance of most who do not know how an IT infra should be to WFH, so pushing people with crappy collaboration platforms, remote desktop tools etc, but such crappy model will not last more than 5-8 years. People will learn enough. Social structures for easy coordination and communication will show up the few years, as well as the "separation concept" from work cohort and neighbor/friends cohort. Not tomorrow, not so easy, but it will happen as always in history habits have changed following technology and current needs.
coreyp_1 4y ago
Yup. I wrote (in another comment) about the emergent behaviors that would come from that idea, and hiring discrimination is one of them. At the same time (and I say this not as a point of argument, but as thinking through the thought experiment), I wonder if there should be some sort of legislative action to discourage the societal and environmental burden of these company policies. For example, I assume that causing numerous people to commute multiple hours each day has some environmental cost. I also assume that there may be some economy of scale that benefits a centralized work force (heating and cooling one building rather than individual homes during the work day). Perhaps the electricity use for computers is better or worse. I don't know. I'm a libertarian in philosophy, and I ultimately believe that people should be allowed to make their own choices about their own life. I also see the injustice, then, of treating corporations as people, which allows the one person who controls the corporation to have more power and influence than the person who does not own a corporation. It is the essence of "some people are more equal than others" from Animal Farm. Again, ultimately, it is a thought experiment. But, I can tell you, that I WFH. Next week, my employer has asked me to come in for a certain meeting, and it is a 2.5 hour commute each way. I get to count the drive as part of my work day. They don't need me to drive in very often. I like this arrangement.

unshavedyak 4y ago

I imagine the 15min commute (by bike! lol) is why you enjoy it. Commute was always my driving force for hating in-office. These days i want land, some chicken, a few goat, etc. By your assertion i would likely have to find a new career, because there's basically no way i can afford 5-10acre and have a sane commute. But i've been WFH for coming on 10 years now. I don't judge office people, but if i can help it i'm done spending 3h of my day commuting on I5 every time there's a wreck (which happens easily 3 times a week in my area, ugh).

Mountain_Skies 4y ago

>As someone who thinks WFH is cancerous A bit provocative, don't you think?

throwaway22032 4y ago
I think that it's negative to society but that it has enough short-term desire behind it that absence of intervention it'll continue growing. Virtual interactions will replace physical interactions as time goes on because there are all of the right pressures there. For example, basically every conference now has the lazy backstop of "just go virtual". Venue fell through? Never mind reducing the size and trying to find somewhere else, just go online because then you can pretend it's not cancelled in all but name. Cancerous is a pretty accurate term for it, I think. It'll kill what it means to be human. Already has in my career, hence me leaving.
gumballindie 4y ago
They probably mean there’s little to no cure for it, so wfh is likely to stay.

dickersnoodle 4y ago

> As someone who thinks WFH is cancerous, this sounds excellent. Found the middle manager who's invested in commercial real estate... B-)

slipshady 4y ago
I think WFH is cancerous too, I'm an engineer with no real estate investments.
- kkfx 4y ago
  Allow me to be rude: humans are social animals BUT the way we socialize have evolved all the time. In the present world just phones have deeply changed the socialization and social rules, mobile phones have deeply changed humanity again. WFH is definitively not so new, but it's application at a certain scale is. Offices are not new, but in the modern sense are a relatively new thing in historic terms. Thinking they are here to stay forever is not different than thinking carriage and horses would be a logistic tool forever, stearic candles a way to light up homes forever etc. WFH now have some issue, MUCH of them due to the crappy ignorance of most who do not know how an IT infra should be to WFH, so pushing people with crappy collaboration platforms, remote desktop tools etc, but such crappy model will not last more than 5-8 years. People will learn enough. Social structures for easy coordination and communication will show up the few years, as well as the "separation concept" from work cohort and neighbor/friends cohort. Not tomorrow, not so easy, but it will happen as always in history habits have changed following technology and current needs.

coreyp_1 4y ago

Yup. I wrote (in another comment) about the emergent behaviors that would come from that idea, and hiring discrimination is one of them. At the same time (and I say this not as a point of argument, but as thinking through the thought experiment), I wonder if there should be some sort of legislative action to discourage the societal and environmental burden of these company policies. For example, I assume that causing numerous people to commute multiple hours each day has some environmental cost. I also assume that there may be some economy of scale that benefits a centralized work force (heating and cooling one building rather than individual homes during the work day). Perhaps the electricity use for computers is better or worse. I don't know. I'm a libertarian in philosophy, and I ultimately believe that people should be allowed to make their own choices about their own life. I also see the injustice, then, of treating corporations as people, which allows the one person who controls the corporation to have more power and influence than the person who does not own a corporation. It is the essence of "some people are more equal than others" from Animal Farm. Again, ultimately, it is a thought experiment. But, I can tell you, that I WFH. Next week, my employer has asked me to come in for a certain meeting, and it is a 2.5 hour commute each way. I get to count the drive as part of my work day. They don't need me to drive in very often. I like this arrangement.