4 ms·

Why the pushback against remote work? When it works it works, and it’s cheaper for everyone involved.

by armchairhacker 3y ago

bogota 3y ago
There wont be. Not any more than we already have. The comment above you is pure sensationalism based on nothing.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
midasuni 3y ago
I suspect the argument would be you can’t deep fake in-person interactions
- lars512 3y ago
  I mean, as long as your deepfake is contributing constructively…
- rickdeckard 3y ago
  Which is just a weird line of thought, leading to "any kind of meaningful decision will only be made when all involved persons are physically in the same room", which results in a chain of meetings between people of different layers and signed papers changing hands. So in conclusion, the argument is that the existence and threat of deepfakes will cause companies to abandon digital transformation entirely and move back to the 80s...
  - falcor84 3y ago
    Paper signatures are of course easy to forge. If anything, I think this will lead to more focus on digital attestation. Maybe even [swallowing a bit of vomit]... blockchain.
- lagniappe 3y ago
  I've been deep faking in-person as a person who knows what they're doing for years
0xEF 3y ago
I think it depends on the industry. For example, I work in manufacturing and we have a sales team that is in the office once a week, if we are lucky. The disconnect in communication between sales, management (who is also mostly remote) and production is absolutely massive and causing issues that did not exist prior to their current remote status. Examples include that both management and sales are often sluggish to respond when production needs clarification for custom work, and that the typical manager or salesperson's comprehension of the products being sold is atrophied simply because their exposure has diminished in recent years. In the context of our business, it would be beneficial if everyone was in the building working side by side and since only two members or our sales team are "outside" sales, there's not a compelling reason for the rest to be working from home. On the flip side, my wife does medical coding, which is entirely remote and doesn't require a constant line of communication to management or your coworkers, for that matter, unless there is a problem, most of which can be rectified with an email, chat or Zoom meeting. There is no compelling reason for her to show up to an office to do computer-based work that can be done literally anywhere with an Internet connection. As the US moves forward with continued remote work, I think it's important that companies be honest with the realities of the market they are in and plan accordingly.
- ponector 3y ago
  If the company is bigger - then even with forbidden remote work you'll have all different divisions scattered across multiple locations and have the same communication issues as with remote team. Turns out the issue is not in the remote\office style but in the processes applied to the organization.

Why the pushback against remote work? When it works it works, and it’s cheaper for everyone involved.

bogota 3y ago

There wont be. Not any more than we already have. The comment above you is pure sensationalism based on nothing.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

midasuni 3y ago

I suspect the argument would be you can’t deep fake in-person interactions

lars512 3y ago
I mean, as long as your deepfake is contributing constructively…
rickdeckard 3y ago
Which is just a weird line of thought, leading to "any kind of meaningful decision will only be made when all involved persons are physically in the same room", which results in a chain of meetings between people of different layers and signed papers changing hands. So in conclusion, the argument is that the existence and threat of deepfakes will cause companies to abandon digital transformation entirely and move back to the 80s...
- falcor84 3y ago
  Paper signatures are of course easy to forge. If anything, I think this will lead to more focus on digital attestation. Maybe even [swallowing a bit of vomit]... blockchain.
lagniappe 3y ago
I've been deep faking in-person as a person who knows what they're doing for years

0xEF 3y ago

I think it depends on the industry. For example, I work in manufacturing and we have a sales team that is in the office once a week, if we are lucky. The disconnect in communication between sales, management (who is also mostly remote) and production is absolutely massive and causing issues that did not exist prior to their current remote status. Examples include that both management and sales are often sluggish to respond when production needs clarification for custom work, and that the typical manager or salesperson's comprehension of the products being sold is atrophied simply because their exposure has diminished in recent years. In the context of our business, it would be beneficial if everyone was in the building working side by side and since only two members or our sales team are "outside" sales, there's not a compelling reason for the rest to be working from home. On the flip side, my wife does medical coding, which is entirely remote and doesn't require a constant line of communication to management or your coworkers, for that matter, unless there is a problem, most of which can be rectified with an email, chat or Zoom meeting. There is no compelling reason for her to show up to an office to do computer-based work that can be done literally anywhere with an Internet connection. As the US moves forward with continued remote work, I think it's important that companies be honest with the realities of the market they are in and plan accordingly.

ponector 3y ago
If the company is bigger - then even with forbidden remote work you'll have all different divisions scattered across multiple locations and have the same communication issues as with remote team. Turns out the issue is not in the remote\office style but in the processes applied to the organization.