Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 508 posts

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#151

Post by bilekas »

Someone1234 wrote: post #46

Because corporations are doing the majority of that pro-environmental advertising. I mean that both in terms of companies making changes (both real and greenwashing) and the News/Media corporations reporting on it. Telecommuting could be absolutely massive for reduced emissions, could bring down urban house prices, improve inter-family relationships, and revitalized suburban neighborhoods (e.g. more walkable areas).…

> Musk's text message conversation during Twitter-lawsuit discovery

I only saw this now : https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2022/09/elon-...

It's actually kind of incredible how it all seems to work. The cringe too of the fawning is a good indicator why Musk feels he can do whatever he likes, including attempting to troll everyone on his board. It seems so juvenile.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#152

Post by osigurdson »

bilbo0s wrote: post #127
Someone1234 wrote: post #46

Because corporations are doing the majority of that pro-environmental advertising. I mean that both in terms of companies making changes (both real and greenwashing) and the News/Media corporations reporting on it. Telecommuting could be absolutely massive for reduced emissions, could bring down urban house prices, improve inter-family relationships, and revitalized suburban neighborhoods (e.g. more walkable areas).…

This. We need to learn that corporations care even less about the environment than they care about remote work. Invoking the environment to gain their support of remote work is just misunderstanding their priorities. The game is to make remote work attractive to them. You think Elon Musk wants to hear your spiel about the environment? Or does he want you to get back into your office and work a 16 hour day? If we want…

>> Or does he want you to get back into your office and work a 16 hour day?

I'm OK with working 16 hour days on something that matters (obviously burn out needs to be kept in check - it can't be done forever). I realize that I might be "wired" differently than others as I care a bit less about work life balance and more about accomplishment (not proud of it). I see no reason why this can't be done at the beach house however. In fact, I'm convinced it would be better as commuting is a burnout accelerator.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#153

Post by eloff »

raxxorraxor wrote: post #146
eloff wrote: post #118

Because people don't look at issues like climate change rationally. We're attacking the problem almost randomly based on what's politically expedient/ popular instead of what gives the biggest greenhouse gas reduction for the price. To phrase it another way, our governments are fucking stupid and it makes me sad. If we really care about this problem, we should attack it coldly, rationally, as an engineer or economist…

It is really stupid, and I hate that people tend to cut random liberties because they could maybe affect the environment ever so slightly. In reality this is so insignificant, it looks more like a panic than an attempt to a solution. You also loose political capital for serious undertakings. Truth is that composting your tea bags isn't that relevant. We have to look at the large picture and see if we can curb the lar…

Even just encouraging fracking (cheap gas vs coal means 2x reduction in carbon), or stopping to subsidize fossil fuels would make a massive difference.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#154

Post by elijaht »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #145
osigurdson wrote: post #122

There is nothing more illogical in modern society than commuting to an office every day. Employees waste 2 of their 16 available waking hours in the non-productive commute while incurring significant financial costs (lease/insurance/fuel/energy) in order to support this patently absurd activity. Employers waste time and energy negotiating leases, re-arranging offices, purchasing AV equipment for meeting rooms, etc.,…

> Employees waste 2 of their 16 I suspect that you don't commute to a large city (either via car or mass transit). It's more like 4-6 hours. Crazy.

The average commute in a large city is definitely not 2-3 hours one way.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#155

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

elijaht wrote: post #154
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Employees waste 2 of their 16 I suspect that you don't commute to a large city (either via car or mass transit). It's more like 4-6 hours. Crazy.

The average commute in a large city is definitely not 2-3 hours one way .

Come to New York, then. I have sad news for you.

DC was even worse.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#156

Post by MSFT_Edging »

lizknope wrote: post #136

We used to spend $400 a month on gasoline because we both commuted 25 minutes each way. During the pandemic that was down to about $100 a month. And when we did have to go somewhere the traffic was so much lower so less wasting gas in stop and go traffic. I'm supposed to go in 3 days a week. In reality I go in once a week for a few hours and no one cares as 90% of the people on my project are in other offices. I told…

Could I ask what you were driving that ~50 minutes of commuting a day would lead to 200 dollars in fuel?

When I was doing the same during the pandemic, similar commute time, my car making 21ish mpg was only needing about 100 dollars in gas a month. About 10 miles with more than a dozen stop lights.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#157

Post by cableshaft »

adql wrote: post #107
lm28469 wrote: post #6

I'm not convinced it is a net positive in the end. Especially for big companies, heating an office space with 500+ people is probably much more efficient than heating 500 individual houses for example Not everyone commute with an ICE vehicle too

Yes but those people don't live in the office... the office wouldn't need to exist in the first place. Could be apartment block instead. Most people also like to come back to warm house so heating is running during the day

> Most people also like to come back to warm house so heating is running during the day

Also if you have pets you don't want it to be miserable for them. You might make it a couple degrees warmer/colder but not too much.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#158

Post by toomuchtodo »

bilekas wrote: post #151
Someone1234 wrote: post #46

Because corporations are doing the majority of that pro-environmental advertising. I mean that both in terms of companies making changes (both real and greenwashing) and the News/Media corporations reporting on it. Telecommuting could be absolutely massive for reduced emissions, could bring down urban house prices, improve inter-family relationships, and revitalized suburban neighborhoods (e.g. more walkable areas).…

> Musk's text message conversation during Twitter-lawsuit discovery I only saw this now : https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2022/09/elon-... It's actually kind of incredible how it all seems to work. The cringe too of the fawning is a good indicator why Musk feels he can do whatever he likes, including attempting to troll everyone on his board. It seems so juvenile.

Important to note that wealth doesn't improve your character; it simply amplifies who you already are.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#159

Post by deepGem »

gundmc wrote: post #83
deepGem wrote: post #79

Two main problems 1. Middle and senior management who don't want to lose control or be rendered less effective. 2. Engineers who are not trained in written communication and largely cannot autonomously move a group towards a goal without a lot of supervision. If you solve for no 2, then that acts counter to no 1 - because middle management will be questioned - why do we need you ? If a group of engineers can function…

What do you consider the role of a manager that makes it change significantly based on where their team is sitting?

I didn't catch the question but I will attempt to answer based on what I understand.

Role of a manager that will change significantly based on where the team is sitting - The ability to convey meaning and emotion over written comms and over video calls, to drive the team forward without being too mechanical about it.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#160

Post by elijaht »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #155
elijaht wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The average commute in a large city is definitely not 2-3 hours one way .

Come to New York, then. I have sad news for you. DC was even worse.

I'm in NJ- my commute into the city is an hour. Most people that I know of have commutes in the 30-90 minute range, throughout NJ, NYC, and Connecticut
Post reply on HN