27 ms·

Sam Altman says era of remote work is over

• ulizzle 3y ago
  So if you can't afford to get some office space in an early startup, you're doomed. "Bootstrapping considered harmful". Where did they clone/download these people?
• dehrmann 3y ago
  > I don't like the open air fentanyl markets either - Sam Altman
• PeterStuer 3y ago
  Tldr: Another fact free anti-WFH puff piece.
• deafpolygon 3y ago
  How to say "I'm becoming irrelevant" without saying that.
• j7ake 3y ago
  The nuance here is that sometimes work from home is more productive, sometimes office is more productive. When initially figuring out what the “problem” actually is then it is better when people are together. When the problem has been well defined, and people just need to run with the project: work from home is better. If project needs pivoting or redefining, back to office is again better. The further along a project is, the better work from home becomes. This is because all members of team have a solid foundation of why the project matters, so they can be free to work with less interactions.
  • lytefm 3y ago
    > "The more unclear and early the product is, the more in-person time the team needs to grind together" I agree and that statement from Sam makes sense to me. Early on, it's great to work face to face. But once a project's or a Startup's direction is set, important decisions have been made and all leaders are on board, it's great to work remotely. I'd say it's also good for new hires, especially juniors, to be on-site for a few months before going full remote.
• ftxbro 3y ago
  Maybe he means that his GPT-6 will be able to do every remote job by itself.
• comrad 3y ago
  An whole ERA is now just a couple of years?
• deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
• butterisgood 3y ago
  Geographic distribution is a feature if you leverage it properly and set the right expectations. It also requires active participation.
• proper_elb 3y ago
  > some of our best people are remote, and we will continue to support it always, so please don't let hating SF stop you from applying to OpenAI! What is a strong sign of conviction? Putting your money behind it. Which is exactly what is not happening here - not only keeping, but being open to increasing the remote working force. So is Sam Altman telling us that... OpenAI is not doing innovative work anymore? Or not valuing collaboration highly?
• research_pie 3y ago
  I don’t get that stance of creative work needing to happen in person. Seems like a CEO having a bias for a specific type of work style. Open source development has been running on remote work forever and it’s doing great. The recent article about OpenAI and Google having their lunch eaten by a bunch of remote hobbyist show how this thinking is flawed.
  • IMTDb 3y ago
    > Open source development has been running on remote work forever and it’s doing great. One bias is that most open source projects are people solving their own problems. They have a deep understanding of the issues at hand and the developers working on a product are also the one using it. This is also why the open source community produces a lot of developers oriented tools. It is also why a lot of remote companies are working themselves in for the tech sector. Compare that with a company that produces software for other industries. The developers working on a product are not the one ultimately using it. One of their main challenges is to ensure that the problems/goals faced by the users are ultimately properly understood by the product teams and developers. This is far more complex and requires far more communication the further away the dev is from being an expert in the target field.
  • mhh__ 3y ago
    Lunch eaten as in OpenAI massively dominating the space? I want open source language models to be good and succeed but be realistic.
  • twelve40 3y ago
    There is a difference between software development and running a business. As in, "hustle to figure out this complicated operational problem or die running out of money in a month", vs "a grab bag of nice-to-have tickets for the next year or so". Besides the fact that many open-source projects like Linux also had a ton of corporate contribution from in-office workers.
• veidr 3y ago
  I came to this thread ready to say that this guy is a moron (and I'm still withholding judgement on that[1]) but there is a fundamental truth here: you have to be good at the tooling. Meet/Zoom/Mmhmm whatever; they aren't good enough for random collections of people to just like, collaborate or whatever, as if they were in the same room. However, these tools are way beyond good enough for some collections of people to perform at a far higher level then they could if they had to waste the time required to colocate. I think that if your team can't work effectively from different locations and across different time zones, then... you might still be able to do some shit and ship some product and make some money! And that's awesome! But, for most forms of software engineering, that's probably an indicator that you aren't a top tier/world class/very good team. Because the best teams can do that, even at industry-leading companies like Apple where they try to pretend that they don't let people do that. And the evidence is most of the great software that shipped 2020-2022. [1]: I mean, he says a lot of other really weird shit, like https://twitter.com/Grady_Booch/status/1654351664319709185?s=20 https://twitter.com/Grady_Booch/status/1654351664319709185?s...
  • jerrygenser 3y ago
    [1] is quoting a Twitter account that is quoting a parody Twitter account. I don't believe that is a thing he actually tweeted or said.
    • veidr 3y ago
      Thanks! I stand corrected, a little embarrassed, but also somewhat relieved :-P Sam Altman's real twitter is: @sama
• mhh__ 3y ago
  Some Creativity can only be easily found in an office with other smart people, some Creativity requires being alone for a week.
• cowanon222 3y ago
  At many large companies there have been a ton of mergers and acquisitions over the last 10 years, and most meetings are already on Teams/Zoom/etc because the workers in the team are in different cities and often different continents. Even in the office many of us are just on Zoom/teams/etc for meetings. Companies have already had mostly distributed teams for a while; this is just about control.
• morelandjs 3y ago
  I’m approaching the point where I feel similarly about WFH deniers as I do about vaccine deniers. We performed an immediate GLOBAL switch to fully remote work and corporate life went on largely unaffected. We have the experimental data strongly supporting that it does not hurt the ability of most workers to function (exceptions apply). What’s more annoying, is that the execs confuse their own 0.0001% career experience with that of their typical employee. Yes, if you’re running a company and in board meetings and such, then it makes sense to be face-to-face. For your SDEs, DEs, and scientists in the trenches? Not so much. My interactions with my manager are great and keep me focused. We have zero problems communicating over video. Most other interactions are generally neutral or net-negative, a distraction from the work I would be doing for my manager. I like these little side interactions, and I enjoy talking with my coworkers, but I don’t think it’s ultimately as beneficial to the bottom line as people think. I can move quite fast when I’m left alone to my own devices.
• flappyeagle 3y ago
  The era of remote work is not over. It’s just arrived. We overshot the equilibrium point by a lot during the pandemic height and that will regress back to something closer to long term trend. No matter how much the HN crowd vociferously defends remote work, it’s simply an inferior mode of operation for many creative jobs. People are not machines. We’re evolved to congregate and share space, to read body language, share meals, interact with zero latency. Those things are valuable, and barring some huge leap in technology, we give them up when we go remote. For some jobs and work cultures, those things don’t matter as much — those companies can self select into remote work and save on office costs. But for American engineers especially, the more you encapsulate yourself into an interface of pull requests and slack messages, the more you’re handing power to corporations in the long run. I can and have hired quality developers in EU, GB, and South America at heavily discounted rates because without an office, what’s the difference? Even interviewing and managing people in Asia is much easier as a result of zoom, slack, figma, etc. I find it so odd that American software engineers don’t see this. Time zone is not a moat, I promise you.
  • tonyedgecombe 3y ago
    >We’re evolved to congregate and share space, to read body language, share meals, interact with zero latency. On the other hand we didn't evolve to spend eight hours a day staring at a screen. Nor to spend two hours a day sat in a car commuting.
    • bordercases 3y ago
      Supposedly a part of correcting an overshoot is possibly finding a hybrid.
  • edmundsauto 3y ago
    > Time zone is not a moat, I promise you. It may not be a moat, but it does serve as constant friction that adds latency. Sometimes you can plan your way so latency doesn't slow things down too much - but anything that requires operational coordination is going to be very difficult.
• jen20 3y ago
  Sounds like Sam Altman might have some commercial real estate he needs to avoid collapsing. Frankly I couldn’t care less what he says, I’ll retire before I go to an office.
• dmitrygr 3y ago
  Cool! Another idiot to avoid working for. I like it when bad workplaces and incompetent bosses advertise themselves. Makes my next job search that much easier.
• mensetmanusman 3y ago
  We need smart hybrid. Clearly there are worker/environmental benefits from not going to the same dusty cube farm 5 days a week. But the abandonment feeling is there when people arrive asynchronously.
• gadders 3y ago
  Always good to hear from an unethical multi-millionaire that can afford to live close to the office.
• piloto_ciego 3y ago
  Why can’t anyone see this for what it is? It’s about power. The problem these organizations have is not that they have people working from home - they don’t really care about that, the problem is that the type of person who runs a company craves the power, and they don’t feel like they’re wielding it when everyone works from their laptops and over zoom. It’s not about the money nor is it about the product. Very few tech companies have never cared about the product after they weren’t startups anymore. No, it’s about having power over others, and control.
  • 8note 3y ago
    There's certainly other factors. They have to make big financial decisions about what to do with office buildings, for one, and need to make sure that if they pay for the offices, that they get value from them. It's risky to drop the buildings and then need them later
• iamleppert 3y ago
  I came here to say the Linux kernel was largely developed remote, by a remote workforce.
• faeriechangling 3y ago
  If people don’t have a good justification for regularly killing and maiming their employees regularly in car accidents, I don’t want to hear hand waves arguments about “work from home was an experiment”!
• pyuser583 3y ago
  It’s really hard to “step up” remotely. Getting your foot in the door, getting promoted to senior, becoming a manager, are much easier if you are in person.
• deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
• brianjking 3y ago
  I like Sam for the most part, but this is something I entirely disagree with.
• sibeliuss 3y ago
  Senior software engineers: sure. Engineer II or below, terrible. Literally zero productivity, or even negative productivity.
  • 01100011 3y ago
    Are you saying remote work only works for Seniors, or remote work is over for Seniors?
    • ghotli 3y ago
      My take is this person is saying their organization does remote poorly and the more junior engineers aren't set up for success. That has nothing to do with remote work at large and feels more like a reflection of the structures in place in that particular situation.
      • sibeliuss 3y ago
        We do remote fine, but it is simply impractical to expect success from jrs in a remote work environment. They need more support and side-by-side guidance to succeed. It's a downward spiral for anyone except the most exceptionally engaged.
• ReDeiPirati 3y ago
  Most of the companies that are declaring remote work as a failure weren’t able to establish good processes and culture on this new setup. Most of these companies are also control freak with low-trust attitude on their employees. Personally, it’s far from be a failure and being over, and likely one of the best equalizer (democratize opportunities) and productivity booster that happened in the industry. However it’s certainly not easy to adopt and integrate correctly.
  • dapperyapp1234 3y ago
    Remote work was an astounding success! Every company, big or small, was able to leverage MS Teams or Zoom just fine. It is only in manufacturing and similar sectors where you need on-site due to the nature of the work. Software Engineering for Web, Desktop, etc. is easily remote-friendly. The problem goes beyond "low-trust" attitude or productivity. Guys like Sam Altman and Elon Musk are Lord Farquad/King Joffrey in real life. The typical corporate setup is a pyramid and these guys have placed themselves on the top. What on earth is happening in the office that is going to magically improve company performance? Is it the slow internet, the persistent disruptions (... i mean collaboration?), the long tiring commutes, or the power-hungry management? Oh yea, its the power-hungry management. Ya see, we work in their castle but the kings don't feel important unless we send them praises (unwillingly) and endure them breathing down our necks. How can they assess our performance without monitoring us? Tbh, its not even about remote work. You can have miserable remote work experiences too. But it makes it so much harder for these psychos to abuse you and get anything out of it when you're comfortably sat at home. I wouldn't mind going to the office if the concept of a boss ceased to exist. Make it opt-in and arrange with your coworkers what/when/how you'll deliver. Edit: In Sam Altman's case he is saying early stage startups/products need people to grind together more closely. Again, that's true for physical products but not for Web/Desktop/Software.
• ghotli 3y ago
  This hasn't been my experience on a completely remote team that was remote (/ multi-city-office) way pre-pandemic. I think culturally you can just do remote wrong or you can do remote right and the SF-mindset-centric scene around here seems (in my experience) to not really lean all the way in on doing it right. In that respect this is just clickbait to me.
• globalise83 3y ago
  Perhaps if he had employees less distracted by office banter they would be able to set up a payment system for their subscription that doesn't mysteriously disappear after the first month.
• dboreham 3y ago
  The "denial stage" of grief.
• remote_phone 3y ago
  I worked for a 100% remote company during the pandemic. It was the least productive job I had. So much time was wasted waiting for people to respond it was driving me crazy. People would disappear for hours at a time and the “asynchronous” working was accepted as the norm. I didn’t even have an office I could drive to to meet other employees. I quit after a few months. I now work for a company where I’m on site but I work on a team that is remote. I’ve made friends with the people around me and when I can’t get answers from my team I can ask the people around me. Being able to have an adhoc 5 min conversation to explain a very complex idea vs scheduling a zoom hours later saves an immense amount of time. The difference in productivity is night and day. I’m so happy to be back in the office.
• samuraijack 3y ago
  What we need is stronger labour laws, so power-trippers such as Sam Altman can't dictate other people's lives.
  • kgwxd 3y ago
    Gotta get back, back to the past, Sam Altman says.
• ChrisCinelli 3y ago
  This is my experience: Being co-located in the same building has a few advantages especially from a company culture and relationship prospective. But finding great talented people around the HQ becomes a big constrain and it is expensive. If you run the company "remote-first" so everyone remotely has the same experience, you may argue that the pros are largely outweigh the the cons. Hybrid is more difficult to make it work but not impossible. The challenge is to keep everything "remote-first" so the remote people are not left behind in any manner. Starting a company/team "remote-first" since the beginning is easier because workflow can be built remote-first. Transitions to remote-first present more challenges.
• Animats 3y ago
  Will Mr. Altman be in his office at 9 AM tomorrow? OpenAI is at 3180 18th St, San Francisco, CA 94110, US. That's a crappy location in the Mission in SF.
• iandanforth 3y ago
  I kinda agree that very early, small teams, should be in person. But OpenAI has ~375 employees. They're 7 years old. A team of that size has hierarchy, it has middle management. There's plenty of room to have people working remotely in that size of an org. Especially when it increases your hiring pool so much. If you just need hackers, throw a net in Palo Alto and you'll catch 5. But if you need the best person to implement a infiniband backbone who also has familiarity with sparse network training? Well they live in Finland. Luckily we don't have to rely on gurus or influencers to decide this. Companies will succeed or they won't and my bet is that plenty will succeed with significant remote headcount and Altman will be shown to be wrong.
  • dapperyapp1234 3y ago
    Its dangerous to say "should be in person". That team should decide based on their needs at the time whether meeting in-person will help them ship faster. It could speed them up or it could slow them down. Some work is just throwing a prototype together to demo (in person might help flesh out the right idea). Other work is investigative/diagnostic (multiple people staring at a screen, searching for a root cause will slow them down).
• drylight 3y ago
  Interesting that he may have had some positive things to say in a 2017 blog post, but has now been deleted? https://blog.samaltman.com/how-to-be-successful-in-a-job-remote-or-otherwise https://blog.samaltman.com/how-to-be-successful-in-a-job-rem... ChatGPT told me about said blog post.
• bediger4000 3y ago
  That seems like a dumb thing to say about an experience so many of us have. My productivity, health and state of mind were all better when I worked from home. Why is Altman lying to me?
  • senttoschool 3y ago
    Depends on your reference frame. You're thinking about it as an individual. But is your company's productivity better? Is your team's productivity better? That's ultimately what will come down to. It's fair to say that HN is overwhelmingly pro-remote work. This is because coding is uniquely "not bad" for remote work. And there are many coders on HN. But pretty much every other department is worse off with 100% remote work, in my opinion. Even software development hits a remote-only wall eventually because you don't create those relationships in person. Everyone is just a mercenary. Very little culture or care is created.
    • toyg 3y ago
      > Everyone is just a mercenary. That simply mirrors corporate culture. For all the chest-beating to the contrary, the overwhelming majority of companies are not "families" or "bands of friends" - they're groups of people there to make money. When the company has no loyalty or compassion towards employees, employees will do the same to the company.
      • senttoschool 3y ago
        Everyone is even more of a mercenary.
      • PeterisP 3y ago
        People don't form loyalty or compassion towards the organization, but they inevitably do towards each other. If you put a bunch of people together on a task, then no matter how they got there - for money, for fame, or forced to do so - they generally do develop shared bonds and do things because of their teammates. Heck, in war when push comes to shove, soldiers aren't really motivated to die for their country but rather for their squadmates - even if they were simply placed there randomly as recruits some weeks earlier, and even if they are literal mercenaries. So for most neurotypical people simply being on at a job for some time is sufficient to form a shared local culture and camaraderie. But that does not happen remotely, not unless people go out of their way to build similar bonds explicitly; the natural process requires being physically close and communicating during routine activities, not just to exchange strictly necessary information.
• danielbln 3y ago
  Keith Rabois, a general partner at venture capital firm Founders Fund, told The Logan Bartlett Show last week, adding that neither he nor his firm would invest in a venture based on it. Younger workers, he noted, “learn by osmosis” in a way that requires in-person interaction, and supervisors discover hidden talent by watching them. Uh huh right, discovering hidden talents, not micromanagement, no sir!
  • AHOHA 3y ago
    “I need to breath on your shoulders, sir, all day for hours to discover your hidden talent!!” Sounds like a poor management style to me
  • viraptor 3y ago
    > Younger workers, he noted, “learn by osmosis” in a way that requires in-person interaction Having spent a considerable number of hours in the last year explicitly doing work with / training junior staff... That's just silly. Start open streams of your work. Give short presentations. Invite junior people when you do something interesting. It's really not a lot of effort and in-person is definitely not required.
    • jwestbury 3y ago
      I spent a couple of pandemic years at Dropbox, working fully remote. My team regularly started up Zoom calls and invited junior engineers to participate in design conversations, troubleshooting, etc., because it helped them to both feel invested in the product and to grow as engineers. The trouble is that this takes explicit effort from senior engineers, whereas in-office teams don't require the same consideration. So, while I fully believe remote work can teach junior engineers as well as in-person work, I don't think it always does teach them especially well, and I suspect that will always be a challenge.
      • viraptor 3y ago
        Why do you think that requires any more explicit effort? In my experience that works the other way - in the office I would need to know if people are coming and organise appropriately large room / do bookings, etc and the whole meeting changes a bit if there's 5 more people observing. Now it's as easy as a slack message "we're talking about / working on Foo at (link), feel free to join (cc @potentially interested people)".
• oDot 3y ago
  Not all remote work is equal, and as a matter of fact if done poorly (read: if you work the same as in the office, but remote) it can be much worse than onsite. I wrote a booklet about avoiding common pitfalls a few years back[0], and really the approach of the business is the most important thing after employee compatibility. [0] https://www.emergencyremote.com/ https://www.emergencyremote.com/
• onion2k 3y ago
  The full quote is a bit narrower than the title implies; > "I think definitely one of the tech industry's worst mistakes in a long time was that everybody could go full remote forever, and startups didn't need to be together in person and, you know, there was going to be no loss of creativity,” he told attendees. "I would say that the experiment on that is over, and the technology is not yet good enough that people can be full remote forever, particularly on startups." There are two points here - firstly he's talking about 'full remote' so hybrid work is still on the table, and secondly he's talking mostly about startups rather than established companies. With those caveats in mind what he says is a lot less controversial. But still a little. Where it's disappointing (to me) is that it seems he's just ... giving up. He's suggesting that there are problems with remote work for creative teams, but rather than think of ways to solve those problems he's defaulting to the not-much-better-for-creativity-and-far-worse-for-other-things 'solution' of working in offices. That's kind of rubbish. Sam Altman is a clever guy who has a ton of experience working in startups, and the suggestion that he hasn't ever seen one work well and can't think of anything other than 'everyone in the same room' isn't very exciting. What's especially sad is that he said this stuff while he was in an office. Surely that's the most creative place!
  • ambicapter 3y ago
    > He's suggesting that there are problems with remote work for creative teams, but rather than think of ways to solve those problems I hate this mindset (and I enjoy remote work). It's not his job to solve remote work for everyone. He probably (definitely) has other topics he's more interested in.
    • noirbot 3y ago
      Sure, but going out and publicly just going "it's a failed experiment" when you're as influential as he is is different than just not trying to solve it for everyone. It's actively contributing to ending the experiment for everyone and reducing the pressure to try to solve the problems.
    • pgeorgi 3y ago
      > It's not his job to solve remote work for everyone. He probably (definitely) has other topics he's more interested in. Interested enough to chime in on a debate that he can't contribute anything meaningful at any rate.
• villgax 3y ago
  Asking him opinions on how to work is a mistake. Love how insecure management is just crumbling at the thought of not watching people work in-person or middle management being laid off outright for busy work or bootlicking in person. All the freelancers, contractors, remote teams, ramen profitable entrepreneurs & outsourcing teams have been remote or not in office all these years. COVID just showed rest of workers how much time & energy was being wasted in mindless commute
• ada1981 3y ago
  So workers generally like remote work better, but it’s more profitable to work together, that’s the takeaway?
• AHOHA 3y ago
  >The idea of fully remote work becoming the norm has come and gone The idea has always been there, it was never new, and it didn’t go anywhere and I don’t think it’s going anywhere either. And then the article says >and the technology is not yet good enough that people can be full remote forever, particularly on startups." Followed by at the end >He also worries some might be freeing up time by using A.I. tools like OpenAI’s ChatGPT and GPT-4—time that his company isn’t utilizing. So, I think the technology IS too good for remote work that companies couldn’t tell if they’re properly enslaving their employees or not, that they fear those employees are still maintaining the required productivity output without being miserable for once.
  • spiderfarmer 3y ago
    Companies are already unable to check if they are utilising their employees time efficiently. People can look awfully busy without doing anything of value. And at some point you want to use strict monitoring (perhaps assisted by AI) to keep tabs on them, they can just as easily work from home. But I doubt that's legal.
    • red-iron-pine 3y ago
      monitoring your use of company assets at home is plenty legal. like, companies can force you to keep your camera on. they already track away time, number of keystrokes per hour, and can parse your MS Teams calls and provide transcripts -- they even do this for end users. Legal Hold software already does this if you need to flag a user. It's not GPT-4 but you can get pretty good insights into what your workers are or are not doing.
      • mk67 3y ago
        e.g. not legal in Germany
• elzbardico 3y ago
  Well, it is kind of funny when a millionaire tech bro tell me that remote work doesn't work to build some silly food delivery applications, when those silly applications run on top of an open source stack that was always heavily built on remote and async settings.
  • ChatGTP 3y ago
    Because what he is really saying is that it’s a problem for him and his plans. Real open communities don’t suffer the same way.
  • 542458 3y ago
    I don’t think that allegory works. That open source stack wasn’t built for the startup. Rather, the startup had a pick of hundreds of open source options and chose the one that worked best. Because there’s no collaboration or relationship between the startup and the OSS projects, of course there’s no need for them to communicate. But I don’t think anybody would argue that a startup doesn’t need to communicate with it’s employees.
  • RestlessMind 3y ago
    That's why I love free markets. Sam is free to experiment with in-office or hybrid model. If you think remote is best, go for it. Ultimately, market will speak loud and clear. Smart people will learn. My personal belief is that hybrid is the best model.
• jxf 3y ago
  Asking a CEO for their opinion on remote work is like asking a feudal lord their opinion on democracy.
  • tyingq 3y ago
    There's also quite a lot of these "remote work doesn't work" posts from C-level execs, board members, etc...that live far away from their company's headquarters. The dissonance is funny.
    • tedivm 3y ago
      The people complaining that remote workers are taking on multiple jobs (without evidence) are the same people who act as CEO for multiple companies and serve on multiple boards.
  • Lio 3y ago
    "How can I effectively employ my Seagull Management[1] style if everyone is working from home?" - 1. Swoop in, make a lot of aggressive noise, shit on everyone and then fly off to the golf course.
    • pgeorgi 3y ago
      You forgot "eat all the sandwiches". If everybody works from home those folks would have to order their food via one of their delivery startups like any ordinary pleb instead of getting company-paid catered food.
  • RestlessMind 3y ago
    Why? My startup's CEO is pretty bullish on remote work.
• outime 3y ago
  It's fine to have an opinion/preference about the topic. I'm ok with CEOs thinking remote is a mistake, the same way they should be ok with people (maybe even the best people you could hire in some cases) not even glancing at their job offers for not being remote friendly.
• andy_ppp 3y ago
  I am so tired of people in this community making vague and unbacked up feelings of how things are... In any other industry this sort of magical thinking would be called out as completely unscientific. You have the money to do actual studies and even hoards of startups to be able to test it. Release the raw numbers and do the study, don't just make things up based on your theory and a quote or an essay. I'm willing to bet there are some startups who can do remote really well and others that fail at it, I doubt it's 100% proven that no startup ever can succeed with a large proportion of remote employees.
  • jemmyw 3y ago
    How would you study it exactly? Start-ups fail all the time for reasons that have nothing to do with their organisation or even execution. And if you prove that some succeed with it and some fail with it, as you suggest, then you've proven nothing. My hypothesis is that it doesn't make any significant difference once the startup has grown beyond its founders (and they can work however works for them). No idea how to test that.
    • andy_ppp 3y ago
      If it can't be measured does it exist? Back to magical thinking again. Maybe you are right there are too many variables at play to make pithy statements about any of this either way. I think YC could at least release anonymised data about all the companies so that people could at least do some analysis to see if statements like this are at least in line with the data. As we know human beings are extremely good at spotting patterns and even better at fooling themselves.
• rsynnott 3y ago
  I mean, for reference this is the guy who thought Worldcoin was a good idea, so I’m not sure that people need pay _that_ much attention to his opinions on random stuff. (I personally dislike remote work and won’t do it again now it’s no longer mandatory, but it seems to work for some people. Many companies have had permanent remote workers for years without the sky falling.)
  • RestlessMind 3y ago
    > I mean, for reference this is the guy who thought Worldcoin was a good idea, I am sure there is some neat name for this kind of fallacy. Person said X which was wrong, so what he says about Y must be wrong too. > I’m not sure that people need pay _that_ much attention Lol. Then why are you commenting on an article about what he is saying?
    • rsynnott 3y ago
      > Person said X which was wrong, so what he says about Y must be wrong too. You could argue that the linked post in indulging in the reverse (a form of appeal to (false) authority): Person said X which is right, so what they say about Y must be right too. Altman has no particular authority here anymore than anyone else who works at a midsized company; that anyone bothered to write an article about his take is due to him being well-known in _completely different_ fields. > Then why are you commenting on an article about what he is saying? The article itself is an example of a sort of broken thinking which has become annoyingly common in HN-land, and is interesting for that reason, _not_ for its actual content.
• mycologos 3y ago
  I think there's a mismatch between C-suite people, especially in startups, who believe that their company is a mission-driven force for effecting change in the world, something that workers can attach themselves to for meaning and purpose, and individual contributors who think the company is OK and maybe a little silly and are happy to help it along for remuneration, but aren't about to make it a load-bearing part of a spiritually fulfilling life. Most companies aren't that meaningful.
• rndmnflnce 3y ago
  Quality, speed and price is all that matters. How does remote work fill that out for your company's business? The age old, "you can only optimize for two of the three". You can make anything optimally work over time, but is a fully optimized remote workflow better than a fully optimized in person workflow and at what cost in relative speed, quality and price? Depending on the people and the problems, some work is just naturally suited to in person. Making a generalization that remote work was a mistake is going a bit overboard.
• ilikehurdles 3y ago
  At what point has Sam Altman ever tried running a fully remote company? OpenAI has leased a building in downtown SF. He already bet on one outcome, the words that follow are justification for it.
• grumple 3y ago
  Yet there are thousands of fully remote companies, plenty of startups that were highly successful as remote only and either IPOd or were acquired as fully remote. Including my current company, and many companies we all work with daily. Lots of the covid inspired remote workplaces weren't ready for it. It's a change, and you have to know how to manage a remote company. That may take time and some people in management may not be able to do it. Sam couldn't make it work. That's a Sam problem, not a remote work problem.
• manneredalex 3y ago
  The headline will lead to confirmation bias among those who only learned to manage by proximity. I do think Sam Altman has expressed something, though, that my teams and I have been feeling acutely over these past few years. The quote: "the more fragile and nuanced and uncertain a set of ideas are, the more time you need together in person" - when my team is tackling something that resists applying formula or process, we do seem to make progress quicker in person than remote. That said, those truly ambiguous ideas make up a small percentage of our work. Given that mass-engagement with AI has opened so many peoples' eyes to how few white collar skills are applied to truly fragile/nuanced/uncertain need, I'm trying to use THAT insight with my organization to evolve what in-person is intended for.
• kkfx 3y ago
  Cities in the past have had many reasons to exists, almost all are essentially disappeared but some social aspects of them it's valuable for those who rule: - if you live in a dense area, in a high rise building, you do not really own anything, oh sure you might own an apartment or more than one, but they are just parts of a bigger thing, tied to it. You are not a human in nature with other humans, you are a part of an artificial ecosystem crafted and ruled by some at the top of the pyramid and to live better or you fight them and win (highly unlikely, since you own next to nothing) or you slavishly serve them and climb the hierarchy. Even if you feel free in similar ways, even MORE free in a city where without owning you still can have so many things, there you are just a part of a complex gear system you do not own. In a home you are the king/queen of a small kingdom interacting to survive and flourish with other peers; - if you live in a city you need services: traffic is a problem, so mass transport is needed, and that's a service, you can't produce food locally nor buy locally produced food, anything need to come from outside, witch are other services. When things goes well almost nobody care about the big and powerful decision allowing them to act freely, when thing goes bad almost all are in an emergency so have not much slack to discuss and decide. Not only humans are pushed to be sheep in a flock they are also bound by the artificial nature of the city as a single complex system/entity; - peoples in cities are easy surveilled, blocked, handled like a flock. In a low density area surveilling a spread population is VERY expensive and hard, blocking them it's next to impossible, depriving them of anything similarly. As a result it's possible to force people to the 2030 agenda state of things a small step at a time in a city: https://www.forbes.com/sites/worldeconomicforum/2016/11/10/shopping-i-cant-really-remember-what-that-is-or-how-differently-well-live-in-2030/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/worldeconomicforum/2016/11/10/s... not outside. That's the big issue with remote work: - it have allowed many fleeing the cities and live better outside them; - it told the value of owning a nice home more than being in a nice apartment in a high rise building, witch means owning anything on top of the ground vs owning just a portion of a building; - it told that's perfectly possible live and work effectively like that. Essentially remote work thought that cities are not needed anymore to live well. Unfortunately for some at the top of the social pyramid cities are deeply needed to rule, frame and profit from peoples life. Since anything that works it's here to stay in a way or another I expect remote work survive, so cities decline to be kind of interment camps without apparent bars, like certain Siberian gulag of the past where mere nature was the bars but only few will been able to remain outside, perhaps with careful actions to deprive them enough to makes life outside too expensive for most.
• NoZZz 3y ago
  I think Sam needs to go get laid.
• data_acquired 3y ago
  I'm fascinated by the discussions around creativity and remote work both on this forum and elsewhere. What is the fraction of open source code [by which I mean community-maintained and built rather than through a company] that ends up being collaborated on remotely? Aren't projects like Linux and others largely managed through remote means (although there are conferences and such from time to time)? Do we really have a strong case that these projects suffer due to the lack of a single office for people to gather everyday? I'm sure my questions can be split into sub-cases and exceptions.
• dkuntz2 3y ago
  i say the sam altman experiment was a mistake
• observer987 3y ago
  Remote work threatens the foundation of the commercial real estate market. Expect a huge push to get people back into the office - especially if there is softness in the job market.
  • dilap 3y ago
    Are the incentives really there? Obviously the people with the real estate would like this, but if they were really that influential, you'd also see a huge push for private offices (=> more space per employee, more real-estate demand), which alas we don't. I think if you see companies shying away from remote work it'll really just be because it isn't proving effective -- because companies will be losing out on huge recruiting and cost-advantages in doing so. I've been working remote for a while, and I'm still pretty skeptical. It's definitely a lot harder to build relationships, which are super-important, I think. Maybe a hybrid model with lots of frequent in-person work retreats could be ideal.
    • theonlybutlet 3y ago
      The biggest thing would be for those that own their premises, who would have to take impairments (write downs) on the values of their assets. Their lease liabilities also start to look exorbitant and many will be forced to act on this, cutting these leases and recognize the lease cancellation cost all at once (usually office leases require all payments for the contract term to cancel), taking a large financial knock upfront. Basically large knocks on their profit in the very short term.
  • fswd 3y ago
    well, as a counter point, it could be a huge win for real estate if given they could convert the office space into apartments for people which is much needed. I know these buildings aren't setup in regards to plumbing and what not, but we can adapt.
    • abawany 3y ago
      there was a neat nyt article that explained why this is not trivial for modern office buildings but is easier for older buildings: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/03/11/upshot/office-conversions.html?unlocked_article_code=yWL6hhUgkV9kWLNexCzGOwA5jRUqnbp6NGve80nBu3GNWwbItL6e3P8ZYIZhL_oeuswdJz5tXjif-NMZNHAnfT3FUeuz_j2N2z458Fz1LLSL0XyqiMGFjNP49F6QCYwCw2svTj9HZ3p89IbXUR-PlUAupG921CrtD1h7aFhdDmnBW79HJSl6184myvrhT2ysCWhSWz5divIaSgj0kgrDdnfG9qYq1GrvGu1rLJormyZrMmzUg_bs9t3z71_dRGyFWkmnN2JGk4bQNVgrGG3fX78_cTHZW2NKL75mt5B467VoUg-lFrWhvLAx_yyjIRPFcO5Ut4ozlJt9IzbklL4GmkfR26Gs_ASuei92&smid=url-share https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/03/11/upshot/office... (gift link)
• stilist 3y ago
  How does this claim interact with the claim that AI is going to eliminate tons of existing jobs?
• electric_mayhem 3y ago
  Tech industry workers say the era of Sam Altman is over; worst pundit ever
• gumballindie 3y ago
  This guy is hellbent on damaging everything under the sun.
  • deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
• ripvanwinkle 3y ago
  > He further added that OpenAI’s some of the best talents are working remotely. He said, "some of our best people are remote, and we will continue to support it always, so please don't let hating SF stop you from applying to OpenAI! I don't like the open air fentanyl markets either.” The above line seems to contradict the part about '..worst mistake of the tech industry'
  • flangola7 3y ago
    Yeah that was particularly gross and unbecoming
    • rchaud 3y ago
      Hey, it could be worse! People could be working for Altman's other plaything Worldcoin, collecting retinal scans of the poor and desperate in India, Indonesia and parts of Africa and handing out company scrip as 'compensation'. https://techcrunch.com/2021/10/21/sam-altmans-worldcoin-wants-to-scan-every-humans-eyeball-and-give-them-crypto-in-exchange/ https://techcrunch.com/2021/10/21/sam-altmans-worldcoin-want...
    • vxNsr 3y ago
      I think being open and honest about the problems the electorate and elected leaders have caused is the first step in the direction of fixing them.
      • blitzar 3y ago
        I think claiming something is a problem while doing the thing that you say is a problem and in doing so generating the largest and fastest pile of valuation $$$$ in the history of man kind is a problem.
      • flangola7 3y ago
        If wanted to be open and honest he would be attaching the wealthiest and paltry wealth and corporate taxes, not those on the bottom suffering from medical conditions like chemical addiction.
• JohnFen 3y ago
  I could not disagree more. At least for the last decade in the places I've worked (major tech companies), everyone has been doing "remote work" anyway even though they were in the office. I mean, meetings were held online, discussion took place through chat, etc., between people literally sitting in cubes next to each other. Everything is just more efficient and less disruptive that way. Working from home changed no work processes at all, at least where I worked, introduced no additional social separation, and yielded large benefits for individuals, teams, and the company.
  • leetharris 3y ago
    You clearly didn't read the article and came to react from the headline. He says the earlier the stage and the more unclear the more you need to spend time together. His general comment is about full 100% transition from in office to remote. I agree with this. You need SOME time in person, especially with an early stage startup.
    • daneel_w 3y ago
      Have you ever done a substantial amount of remote work in order to get a real idea of its contrast against in-office?
    • JohnFen 3y ago
      I did read the article, and I did understand it. I just disagree with his position. > You need SOME time in person I'll agree with this. But it can be on an as-needed basis, not a regularly scheduled thing. This is how I've done it in my own startups. I had office space for people who wanted to come into the office (many prefer that), but it was not mandatory. We'd have in-person meetings every so often as needed. On average, this was about once per month.
      • acapybara 3y ago
        While I understand the sentiment that some in-person time may be beneficial, I'd argue that it's not a strict requirement for a successful work environment. With the advancements in technology and communication tools, we can now maintain strong connections with our colleagues, even without face-to-face interaction. Virtual meetings, team-building activities, and online workshops can serve as effective substitutes for in-person gatherings, allowing teams to stay connected and collaborate effectively. The key lies in fostering a culture of open communication and trust among team members, regardless of their physical location. By prioritizing these values and leveraging available technology, it's possible to create a cohesive and productive remote work environment without the need for in-person meetings. As the landscape of work evolves, it's essential for us to adapt and explore new ways to connect and collaborate, transcending the boundaries of traditional office settings.
• coffeefirst 3y ago
  Cool. Can I have a private office with a door? Because I have one at home and just I don't see myself giving that up.
  • neodypsis 3y ago
    I also find it more productive to work in a private space.
    • blitzar 3y ago
      I also find a corner office, high floor, prime aspect with a view over a major metropolis to be beneficial to my productivity. 500sq ft++, with private bathroom should do it. Also outdoor roof space, optional but it really is the difference between 5x and 10x for me.
  • foogazi 3y ago
    Tech leaders conveniently ignore Peopleware but still cry about productivity loss
  • chris222 3y ago
    No bullpen seating is clearly the best choice for people doing focus work. /s
    • pxmpxm 3y ago
      Don't forget hot desking!
• macinjosh 3y ago
  The mistake was doing the transition suddenly with no foresight or planning. Remote is possible but the systems and culture need to be ready for it first.
• blitzar 3y ago
  > He said, "some of our best people are remote, and we will continue to support it always, so please don't let hating SF stop you from applying to OpenAI! I don't like the open air fentanyl markets either.” I am going to give him the benefit of the doubt and say that the reporting is terrible, not that the guy is an idiot and can not stick to a consistent thought process in the course of a single 30 minute panel at a conference.
  • disgruntledphd2 3y ago
    I think that if you live in SF and are a CEO then trying to get people in person makes sense. If you are anywhere else then you gain an awful lot from the recruitment flexibility of remote. But as a former eng manager at Mozilla used to say, sometimes the best tool for remote work is a plane.
• JohnFen 3y ago
  > Altman also spoke about the future of AI. According to Altman, AI needs to be treated with “extreme seriousness” as the tech might have “existential risk” attached to it. I really, really wish that OpenAI would start behaving as if they believed this.
  • dsr_ 3y ago
    It's not like Altman has any influence over OpenAI.
    • mkl 3y ago
      What? He's the CEO.
      • dsr_ 3y ago
        People often fail to recognize sarcasm on the Internet.
        • mkl 3y ago
          People are often ignorant and confused on the internet (far more than sarcastic) so that's how you come across.
  • justrealist 3y ago
    They have a philosophy which may be wrong but is not entirely incoherent (expose risk as capacity becomes available, so we aren't caught off-guard by high-capacity risks we can't recover from). And let's be honest, GPT-4 is vastly better aligned than any of the other LLMs. Not a super high bar, but it's a bar.
    • JohnFen 3y ago
      > GPT-4 is vastly better aligned than any of the other LLMs. If I'm being completely honest, I can't judge that at all, because it's far from clear to me what, specifically, people mean by "alignment" when they use that term. And I'm pretty sure that different people are meaning different things.
• pdonis 3y ago
  When you actually look at the claim Altman can defend from his own experience, it's not that remote work doesn't work for "the tech industry"; it's that remote work doesn't work for early stage startups. But most of "the tech industry" is not early stage startups. Most of the people working in the tech industry could still be working remotely, while at the same time the small fraction of them that are working at early stage startups could be working in person in an office (or hangout space, or whatever), and the tech industry would do just fine. Unfortunately, when I look at Altman's track record as a pundit (as opposed to as a startup developer), this kind of schoolboy error is what I usually see.
  • dehrmann 3y ago
    He does claim that, but you can extend it to early-state projects, even at big companies. It also makes onboarding harder, so you have to include that factor, too.
  • wg0 3y ago
    So two friends living in two different places can never build a product and then business around it together. They must be sitting within one meter proximity or the magic potion doesn't work.
    • RestlessMind 3y ago
      Why don't you show us successful startups where people built it fully remotely without meeting each other in person? Sam is claiming that in early stage startups, one need some in-person interaction which I fully agree with.
      • wg0 3y ago
        As the claim is being made in the above - I'd like to see the startups that didn't work out solely because they were remote. There are plenty of companies working fully remote of different sizes ranging from a duo to a trio of three up to few hundred. The claim is as absurd as startups not having mechanical keyboards or not using JIRA fail miserably to capture market.
• daneel_w 3y ago
  Does he happen to have substantial investments in real estate portfolios or something?
  • leetharris 3y ago
    I guess you can't have an opinion unless there's a reddit level conspiracy theory about capitalism.
    • foogazi 3y ago
      never attribute to malice…
• DubiousPusher 3y ago
  Sam Altman is the worst mistake of the tech industry. edit: Like, I'm only half snarky. He ran like one ok company and then got pretty much coronated into OpenAI. edit: edit: Like really. It was a company that let you share your phone location. Revolutionary unicorn to the moon on steroids for sure. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loopt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loopt
  • toomuchtodo 3y ago
    Success is mostly luck and finding opportunities from people who will give them to you. Fancy lottery with ceremony.
    • JohnFen 3y ago
      This is a fact. Hard work, a good plan, and a good idea are what buy you the lottery ticket. But it's still a lottery.
  • vxNsr 3y ago
    He ran ycombinator for a while too. I think that’s where he gets his reputation from.
    • nullityrofl 3y ago
      Yes, that's certainly where he gets his reputation on HN from. He's largely considered not-that-impressive off HN (e.g., people who have worked for or with him and I say that as someone in that category).
      • JohnFen 3y ago
        To me, he'll always be the creepy WorldCoin guy.
        • deleted 3y ago
          [deleted]
• ivan_gammel 3y ago
  I read it as this guy failed to build a distributed team that would meet his expectations and now extrapolates it to the entire industry. I have heard similar conclusions from a founder who invested a lot of money in a big fancy office in a great location only to discover that half of the team prefers full remote. The team was ready to work this way, the founder was not.
  • JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    Broadly speaking, this is the entire RTO vs. RW debate. Over-extrapolation mixed with religious zeal. That there are multiple optima is anathema in this context.
    • iWasAGrocer 3y ago
      While I agree, in general the debate I see is: - RTO Bosses telling others it’s time to return to the office or news articles about their opinion. - RW Individuals in the comments saying that they are remote and it’s actually working great, these bosses can go to hell I work on a team that’s split, with some people choosing to go to the office once or twice a week. For our team it seems to be working very well, but as a fully remote worker, I’m firmly in category 2.
• h0l0cube 3y ago
  ... for startups: > Discussing about the importance of working from office for a startup, Altman noted, “The more unclear and early the product is, the more in-person time the team needs to grind together," he added.
• berkut 3y ago
  If you actually look at the quote and not the flamebait title, he says the "experiment" of there being no loss to creativity with remote work is over, and that the tech isn't there yet for early-stage startups.
• _s 3y ago
  I assume he’s got either direct or indirect links to commercial realestate; as an owner or investor or something else. It makes literally 0 business sense to be forking out anywhere from a few hundred to a few thousand per employee per month to give them a space to work, when that can just be avoided. The amount of cost and overheads involved; from insurance to upkeep to rent to OHS - a work space is probably the next biggest expense for a company after salaries. One that can be pruned with very little pushback. And unlike an employee, that’s an expense that’s usually on much, much longer terms (decades in a lot of instances). No alleged productivity gains are worth the time / cost, other than managers wanting to see the kingdom they rule over or they sit to gain from paying that money somehow.
  • flappyeagle 3y ago
    Why do you assume this? Sam literally takes no salary or compensation of any kind from OpenAI because he thinks he has enough money. Your bias is clouding your judgement.
    • proper_elb 3y ago
      Obviously the "indirect" part of the post you are responding to applies. Your last sentence seems to indicate that you know more than us - if so, enlighten us please about the incentive situation of Mr. Altman. (Whose products I value quite a lot, I will say)
      • flappyeagle 3y ago
        https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/24/openai-ceo-sam-altman-didnt-take-any-equity-in-the-company-semafor.html https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/24/openai-ceo-sam-altman-didnt-... This is public information.
        • proper_elb 3y ago
          Yes (did not doubt that), but this is of course only one part of the puzzle. Remember that the assumption of the post you responded too suggested incentives tied to real estate (stock in real estate sector might already be enough), and not about salary/stock in OpenAI. What about other engagements, promises made and so on? Has he declared that incentive-wise there is nothing else than OpenAI going on for him?
• andyjohnson0 3y ago
  I worked 40% remote from 2002 until the pandemic, when I (like all my colleagues) went to 100% wfh. Now we don't even have an office anymore. I've never been more productive, or happier with my work. In my experience, Sam Altman is just wrong.
• tourgen 3y ago
  [dead]
• misssocrates 3y ago
  Are there any counter examples of remote-first new companies that built something exceptional while always being remote?
  • rickette 3y ago
    HashiCorp, GitLab, GitHub (mostly).
  • deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  • gumballindie 3y ago
    All open source projects are remote, including Linux. That's a rather exceptional. Not a company but shows that great, complex, engineering can be built remotely. Probably because engineers need focus and time to think. Gitlab is also fully remote.
  • cultureswitch 3y ago
    Maybe not exceptional but Canonical is fully remote
• Avalaxy 3y ago
  Nah, I'm good. I have been much more productive at home than I've ever been in the office. Happier too; I'm saving 2 hours of travel time per day, that I now get to spend on my hobbies. Not going back.
  • acapybara 3y ago
    Right there with ya! Staying home has so many perks. And hey, let's not forget the environmental impact: less commuting means less pollution and fewer traffic jams. Plus, by embracing remote work, we're not just lining the pockets of big landlords and property owners. We're taking control of our time, our space, and our lives, all while doing our bit for the planet. No turning back now!
    • chris222 3y ago
      The benefits are so obvious it is amazing these “tech geniuses” are so behind the times.
• acapybara 3y ago
  I can't help but feel that Sam Altman's statement dismissing remote work as the "worst mistake of the tech industry" is not only greedy but also shortsighted. Personally, remote work has given me the flexibility to balance my work and personal life, while also allowing me to collaborate with talented individuals from around the globe. It has broken down barriers and enabled us to build a more diverse and inclusive workforce. By brushing off remote work, we are ignoring the countless benefits it has brought to both employees and employers. I've seen my own commute times reduced, experienced better work-life balance, and enjoyed improved mental health, all thanks to remote work. Additionally, businesses can save on operational costs due to decreased office space requirements. The environmental impact of remote work should not be understated either. As someone who used to commute daily, I've come to appreciate how reduced commutes can lead to a significant decrease in greenhouse gas emissions and contribute to a cleaner, more sustainable planet. Living in a world where technology enables us to collaborate and communicate seamlessly from anywhere, why should we restrict ourselves to the confines of a physical office? Remote work has the power to create better solutions, foster innovation, and improve the overall quality of life for everyone involved.
• roozbeh18 3y ago
  sounds good. put me back into the office with far less meetings then jumping from zoom meeting to another...
• sergiotapia 3y ago
  99% chance he has a vested interest in commercial real estate. Take what he says on this matter with a gigantic DOUBT pill.
  • qwertyuiop_ 3y ago
    Bingo CRE is about to blow up big due to interest rates. RTO is not going to save it.
  • deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
• s5300 3y ago
  [flagged]
  • dang 3y ago
    Ouch. What a horrid thing to see on HN from anyone about anyone. You can't post like this here, regardless of who you have a problem with. As we have had to warn you about flamewar comments in the past and asked you refrain from personal attacks just a month ago, I've banned this account. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35457642 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35457642 (April 2023) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29621470 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29621470 (Dec 2021) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28995867 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28995867 (Oct 2021) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23174566 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23174566 (May 2020) If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
  • acapybara 3y ago
    Nobody should get bullied, no matter who they are. Being kind and understanding is the way to go, my friend.
    • trallnag 3y ago
      Nobody? What about Wladimir Putin?
    • s5300 3y ago
      [flagged]
• fooker 3y ago
  I have noticed that senior employees, rather selfishly, advocate for full remote work. This robs junior people of valuable one on one mentorship and makes it extremely difficult to gain domain expertise and break into niche fields.
  • helij 3y ago
    When I was an associate/junior I longed for remote work but seniors tried to keep me in the office as much as they could. Now that I am a senior I advocate for remote work to enable associates/juniors that want to work from home to do so. We have offices and whoever wants to do so can work from the office. Many associates/juniors use that opportunity but still the general consensus is that flexibility is the key here - they maybe come to the office once or twice a week.
    • fooker 3y ago
      > flexibility is the key here I'm not sure about this. Flexibility brings uncertainty, and if you are not sure about who's going to be there in the office, there's not much value proposition to go and check. If you know for sure that all/most people are going to be there, this equation changes considerably. That being said, I think it makes sense to reduce physical presence to ~2-3 days a week, unless having two work environments is cumbersome.
      • helij 3y ago
        We always communicate and somehow end up in the office together. There's always a way. Many weeks someone says 'I'll be in the office on this day. Anyone else coming in?' And then a few people say yep, let's do it.
  • spudlyo 3y ago
    I disagree with the premise that valuable one on one mentorship requires a physical presence. I've done a lot of mentoring over Slack and Zoom, and at least on my side, it was a rewarding experience.
• qwertyuiop_ 3y ago
  https://nypost.com/2022/09/07/blackrocks-larry-fink-vows-harder-line-in-bringing-workers-back-to-office/ https://nypost.com/2022/09/07/blackrocks-larry-fink-vows-har... https://gizmodo.com/amazon-return-to-office-remote-work-big-tech-1850129574 https://gizmodo.com/amazon-return-to-office-remote-work-big-... https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/new-york-elections-government/ny-nyc-officials-acknowledge-lack-of-remote-work-fuels-staffing-crisis-20230306-3ktwru7tebg2fmcijtu3m2rry4-story.html https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/new-york-elections... Just like masking and locking down 4 year olds, Everyone is singing the same tune again. Who is their puppeteer.
  • acapybara 3y ago
    Wow, qwertyuiop_, seems like you're tryna connect the dots to make it some big conspiracy. Newsflash, buddy: it ain't about some puppeteer controlling everyone.
• cultureswitch 3y ago
  I'm inclined to say calling things open when they're very obviously closed is a worse mistake. But that'd be petty.
• mullingitover 3y ago
  I can definitely understand how there's more collaborative bandwidth when you have a small group in a room, focused on a large, complex project such as early stages at a startup. However, I don't think that's necessary once you've broken up the tasks and started executing. Once you're at that stage, being crammed together in an office where everyone's trying to do head-down work on their own is a productivity killer. When MS came on the scene, my understanding is that their recruiting strategy was to get top talent and give everyone their own office, with a door. The thinking was that you're hiring people to focus on a problem, so give them a quiet place where they can work in peace. With that approach, MS proceeded to wallop the rest of the tech sector to the point that they were considered too successful. Fast forward to the final days of the pre-pandemic world, everyone forgot that lesson and was deeply entrenched in the cargo cult of open plan offices. Going back to that dynamic for mid-stage/mature business is a huge blunder.
  • theonlybutlet 3y ago
    More collaborative bandwidth, basically video calls aren't being used effectively, people are too rigid in how they use it and too reserved in what they say. People see calls as this formal thing, like it's still a novelty or something. Leave the call running when you go for a break, open up a whiteboard on a separate screen. There's plenty of ways to overcome this, people just aren't using the tools effectively, we need some video call training.
• Aloha 3y ago
  I don't really care what Sam Altman has to say, or doesn't have to say about any given topic. Like this is the smart persons problem, being successful at one thing, does not make you an expert on any number of other things. For example, being an AI luminary does not make your opinion on working conditions or or cars, or whatever else you happen to have an opinion on.
• simmerup 3y ago
  That's not what the article says. The quote was specifically about startups 'going full remote forever'. That's way different to saying the era of remote work is over. Lazy clickbait OP.
• deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
• cjk 3y ago
  I emphatically, categorically disagree. Maybe _perceived_ productivity and creativity is worse in some cases because remote workers can't physically be seen working, but that doesn't mean it's _actually_ worse. Almost every engineer I know is able to be far more creative and productive working remotely than from an office, regardless of whether or not they need to collaborate closely with others.
• la64710 3y ago
  The main thing is that banks are failing without a vibrant commercial real estate market. Of course the common men and women are too stupid to understand that according to these CEOs , so all they can do is make up some bullshit ideas about how lazy people are working remotely and how productivity suffers ( /s look at the revenue trends of lost companies during 2020-21-22). It would be much better and honest to simply say let’s all get together to prop up the banks.
• tootie 3y ago
  Remote work has been the norm for at least 15 years. Ever since tech companies realized they could get cheaper coders in India, we've been working in distributed teams.
• librish 3y ago
  The debate around this usually turns pretty unproductive because many of the people who are pro-WFH are unwilling to entertain the idea that working from home is just a net negative for the company. Any pushes for WFH gets blamed on either middle managers who have nothing better to do than micromanage you, or Big Corporate Office who has millions on the line.
  • falcolas 3y ago
    > working from home is just a net negative for the company Probably because the research doesn't really back that statement up. Plus, the moment you have more than one office, you're effectively working from home even when you're in the office. And, anecdotally, I've found that people who WFH are more likely to overwork themselves than those who are in the office.
• acapybara 3y ago
  Remote work has been a game-changer in promoting diversity and inclusivity, particularly for underrepresented communities such as Black professionals. By breaking down geographic barriers and providing equal access to job opportunities, remote work empowers talented individuals from all backgrounds to excel in their careers. This shift helps to create a more level playing field, fostering innovation and driving progress forward in the tech industry (thus far dominated by whites).
• slowmovintarget 3y ago
  If the headline were succinct there'd be no point in reading the article: "Sam Altman says startups need in-person work to get going." Here in the real world, we'll happily keep the policy of "remote first, but not remote only" where we occasionally do get together in a shared workspace for high-bandwidth exchanges of ideas. But I won't be tearing my home office down any time soon.
• gmonk 3y ago
  It's rarely the "makers" saying remote work is a mistake. It's almost always the "managers." >> http://www.paulgraham.com/makersschedule.html http://www.paulgraham.com/makersschedule.html
  • throwoutway 3y ago
    The managers I know are also pro-remote and have pro-remote teams. Perhaps VP-level managers Id agree with you
• dahwolf 3y ago
  Long running trends unrelated to the pandemic: Off-shoring, near-shoring. Where some of your colleagues are permanently virtual-only. Cross-company collaboration. Specifically a lot of work involving dealing with external parties like vendors. Due to companies outsourcing many of their processes and systems. Family situations becoming more complicated when couples both work, thus many work schedules no longer being a simple 5x8. Commoditization of digital collaboration: email, chat, teams/zoom calls. The rise of multi-tasking: many people are pulled in 20 directions. When you add up all these effects, a return to the office is not a return to glory. I loved the way I worked 20 years ago: small group of people, local only, focused work, deep relations with co-workers, fun, spontaneous ideation, etc. When I "return to the office" now, I see people with headsets in calls. Roughly 4-6 hours per day, and then there is messaging and email still. Working together barely seems to happen for the simple reason that actual work seems to barely happen. It's just calls and chat now. A productivity pandemic and I'm shocked how leaders do not intervene at all. Maybe they can't. Maybe our world and work has simply become too complex.
  • chris222 3y ago
    4 day work week as standard is the next trend. And they will fight it equally despite the amazing mental and physical health benefits.
• jussy 3y ago
  I don't mind the article as I take the points as the location of work should match the stages and culture of the team/business. In a weird parallel to "the difference between a house and a home". If I was being general I'd say that leaders need to focus on creating an environment where people feel secure, engaged and connected to each other. And people are empowered to create this environment for others. What location this is done in shouldn't be the focus. Offices, factories, beaches, houses don't have the above because buildings don't create it, people do.
• korginator 3y ago
  Quite the opposite. Several divisions in my organisation and others in our group have decided to gradually move to a model where about half of us work from home for the medium term, and that number is expected to increase over the next five years. They are already saving a significant amount of money by giving up our old offices. The mode of engagement between staff and across teams has obviously changed and continues to do so, but productivity is back to pre-Covid levels. We meet in person when there's a real need, say once a week or two. Even allowing for the possibility that the contents of the article are true (which I seriously doubt ... it reads like sloppy reporting and cheap sensationalism) this is one man's view, biased and coloured by his own interests.
• garbagecoder 3y ago
  It’s guys like this that are going to destroy the American tech sector by creating a political backlash on the scale of tobacco.
• makingstuffs 3y ago
  Autonomous working has proven to be a game changer for myself and others in my team. I can login and out when I need to (meetings/stand ups I obviously need to factor in) which allows me to take an actual break and go somewhere with my dog when I am feeling bogged down/unproductive. The ability to do this means that, when I return to the desk, I am refreshed and ready to tackle a problem with fresh eyes instead of glazed over and looking at a clock anxiously waiting for my time to jump on a train and commute to my home. This rhetoric that remote work is bad for business seems to always come from people whom I suspect have an ulterior motive — usually people with investments in real estate and retail businesses which are taking a hit from the lack of lunchtime and rush hour footfall. My manager once said to me “I hired an adult, so I don’t need to hold your hand” and this has resonated with me since. If you cannot trust your staff to do what is best for you then that is your problem for hiring the wrong people. It isn’t the problem of an entire industry.
  • jochem9 3y ago
    The point of the article is that for team work with unclearity you are more creative by working in a physical space together. If your work can be done in isolation and doesn't require a team to deal with any uncertainty, then by all means work fully remote. However, if your work is about innovation and collaboration, then it's going to be more effective to spend time together. I think it's telling that you talk about 'looking at a clock'. If that's how you spend your office time, then indeed there might be something off. E.g. a controlling manager who wants their minions to be visible and on the clock. Personally I work one or two days from home. Some team members more, a few even fully remote (but it's noticable that they are more task oriented and less included in any new concepts/roadmaps/designs/etc). The majority of the people spend the same one or two days together in the office where all kinds of formal and informal interactions happen that further the collaborative creative process.
    • jollofricepeas 3y ago
      Or… Just have optional office hours, Slack huddles and mob sessions every few days. Some of my engineers… - have a open huddle for a few hours a day where anyone can drop into their project while they work - others make use of our scheduled themed mob sessions (ie. Maintenance Mondays, deployment Thursdays). have a problem, idea or just want to hangout then come by? - ICs & seniors are required to host at least a weekly office hour to assist juniors or teach something of their choice. The default doesn’t always have to be return to office for a physical meet. There’s lots of other options.
• throwaway02sfv 3y ago
  If every organization feels like for improving org outcomes bringing workers to the office is absolutely crucial, then that org should bear the cost as well. The org should pay for gases, pay for time in commute, pay for car and cover it's insurance. For people who moved to colocate with the org, org should pay for their rents too. After all, it's the orgs decision to call workers for it's own profits, why should a worker be paying for this unnecessary expenses when the alternative of remote is very much feasible. Allowing workers to work remotely or in-office is the choice of the organisation. Since, it's a choice... It should come with a price tag associated with it. Alternatively, of govt as well feel that workers are needed back in the office, all of the above expenses should be allowed to claim back during taxation. My simple question is how fair is it for workers to pay for the luxury choices made by their respective employers?
  • o_nate 3y ago
    I guess the market will reach an equilibrium. Over time, if workers prefer WFH, they will demand a premium to work in person, so employers will end up paying.
• chris222 3y ago
  Heavily disagree and I run remote teams.
• villgax 3y ago
  Lol, nobody asked for his expert opinion on something which has been happening ever since the internet whether it is outsourcing, freelancing or entrepreneurship which by itself begins without renting/buying an office until you need it absolutely. Let people/companies decide what works for them
• andreskytt 3y ago
  Let’s see what the classics say about this. Mr Conway says, that an organization creates a system in its image. Thus, if the system needs to be very distributed, so does the organization. So unless there is a singular monolithic thing built by a focused local team, a singular monolithic team makes no sense. And a team that’s not like that benefits little from their physical location, as a large chunk of their work is non-physical communication anyway. Even when the other team sits in the same building, who’s going to spend 10 minutes going to another floor when they can just message? Office architecture is seen as ideologically driven. People like open offices so we do those. People like working from home (or office), so we do that. But office structure is as much part of the architecture of your enterprise as is database or microservice structure. It should aid progress toward a particular goal of the organization and not be subject to any hype in any direction.