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

401–410 of 508 posts

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

#401

Post by LucasBrandt »

rickydroll wrote: post #382
_huayra_ wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and revitalized suburban neighborhoods (e.g. more walkable areas) Without other changes, this would not happen (in the US at least). The default would be every more cookie-cutter suburban sprawl, with the cul-de-sac-y construction of these neighborhoods creating a more labrynthian, difficult-to-walk place to live. Until there is more mixed-use zoning in the US, with high enough density to justify frequent public tr…

I'm okay with the current suburban model in many ways. For me it would make a difference is dedicated bike lanes. I walk for exercise my neighborhood and the labyrinth is a welcome pattern to reduce boredom. Public transit will never work for me except under very rare circumstances. For what it's worth, I hate wasting my time traveling and cars are the only things fast enough make going anywhere vaguely tolerable. Am…

I don't want to discount that you're largely content with the the suburbs as they're built today - that's fine and there's nothing wrong with enjoying it. I do want to point out that from my point of view living in a really dense area, some of the reasoning is contradictory.

> I walk for exercise in my neighborhood

> Public transit will never work for me ... I hate wasting my time traveling and cars are the only things fast enough to make going anywhere vaguely tolerable

The suburban model doesn't allow people to live close to any of the places they go. I too dislike wasting my time traveling, but I don't have to: I can walk five or ten minutes to the grocery store, dentist, park, restaurants, etc. I end up walking a lot over the course of a week, and personally I also bike to further destinations (a lot more people would here too if there were protected bike lanes like you mentioned you want). My travel time _is_ my exercise time - no need to spend time on extra walks to accomplish that, and there's interesting things around me when I go from place to place. The subway or commuter rail can take me further away faster than a car when I need to go somewhere distant.

But I'm lucky I can afford to live in a part of Chicago that hasn't been totally disinvested in over the last half century, like a lot of the city has. The state didn't pave a highway through the middle of it like they did to other - mostly black and brown - parts of the city to convenience suburban drivers.

The suburban model that works just fine for you comes at a cost to society. We need to reckon with that and build more places where people aren't forced to drive for their day-to-day necessities and desires.

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

#402

Post by jmcphers »

I used to have a job that required a daily commute, but didn't require any travel.

I now have a remote job that I do at home, with an extremely modest amount of travel -- I see my teammates 2-3 times a year at conferences or meetups.

It turns out that flying, even very occasionally, is worse for the environment than driving, and that my "eco-friendly" remote job leaves a bigger carbon footprint than my commuting job. A single person's share of a single cross-country flight once a year can emit more carbon than an ENTIRE YEAR of car commuting.

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/27/sunday-review/the-biggest...

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

#403

Post by deckard1 »

8note wrote: post #364
anikom15 wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The incentive to live in a dense environment is being close to work. If work is at home then that incentive is gone.

The incentive for living in a dense environment is that you get to use common infrastructure for power, water, sewage, health care etc, rather than running your own septic tank and so on. Even suburbia isn't dense enough to support those things

septic tanks?? You're talking about rural America. Not suburbs. The only suburbs I've seen with septic tanks were in neighborhoods sitting below the main sewer line. Because shit can't run uphill. Power and water? Do you know a single suburb not connected to the power grid or doesn't have running water? Do you live in the 1800s?

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

#404

Post by asiachick »

msmenardi wrote: post #243
MarcoSanto wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. FFS who wants to stay home to live and work!?!? I don’t understand WFH. the right way is to have better public transport and cheaper housing, not secluded lives.

It'd also be nice if companies were forced to pay for time spent commuting

why? you chose to take the job far from your house.

if companies are forced to pay for the time commuting people will choose to live 20 hours away

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

#405

Post by shtopointo »

Couldn't the opposite be argued as well?

Everybody spending 8 more hours at home means so much more individual heating, whereas before, when you went into the office you'd turn the heating off.

Also as someone else pointed, working remote leads to leaving small apartments in the city to move into larger spaces (houses) in the suburbs. Then you would need to use a car more to meet people, get groceries etc. Cities are much more carbon efficient.

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

#407

Post by nelsonenzo »

Idk, I thought it was mentioned in almost every article that discusses the pros and cons of remote work.

Not all jobs can be remote though, so i'm not sure why one would expect all of work to be remote. That makes as much sense as 'no remote work at all'.

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

#408

Post by aembleton »

shtopointo wrote: post #405

Couldn't the opposite be argued as well? Everybody spending 8 more hours at home means so much more individual heating, whereas before, when you went into the office you'd turn the heating off. Also as someone else pointed, working remote leads to leaving small apartments in the city to move into larger spaces (houses) in the suburbs. Then you would need to use a car more to meet people, get groceries etc. Cities are…

Maybe if you can get to the office via public transport or cycling it might make sense. But, if you drive then it's consuming more energy than heating the room you're in at home.

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

#409

Post by Asooka »

ljf wrote: post #202
ibejoeb wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't intend to de-rail the convo, but this is an important one. > improve inter-family relationships It could , maybe, but it can also be a significant source of strife. It's tough spending all day, every day with someone. Because of that, you find that people are either looking for larger homes in order to have private work spaces or renting office space. Both of those shift the cost burden from the company to th…

You are very right - I am very lucky to have a shed/office I can hide away in and get some great work done in. I'd say it is a far better and more comfortable space than any office I've worked in. But when I had to work at the kitchen table with my wife and family in other rooms in the house it was so much harder. For those with room, especially if you have a good sized commute, remote working is great (I really real…

I can't imagine living in a home where every member doesn't have their own quiet/study/work space. I say this as someone who has lived most of his life in apartment buildings where that was a bit challenging, but definitely not impossible. I guess maybe if you are used to living your life outside of the house an just visit to eat and sleep you feel differently, but that's the beauty of WFH - you get to pick what best works for you.

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

#410

Post by ProZsolt »

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #315
sitkack wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> can't absorb the context and experience of their more senior coworkers How so? What prevents that? I don't believe it, but people like saying it without evidence.

My own experience as a junior during the forced WFH transition of the pandemic is, albeit anecdotal, proof for me. It sucked. If the company doesn't shift and completely overhaul its entire culture from the ground up to full remote including junior mentoring, it's difficult to see, especially from the managers and senior perspective who already know the "games" of the organization and the know-how to get their work d…

I can completely understand your position, but it shouldn't be like that.

I started my carrier as a remote employee before the pandemic. Pairing helped a lot to learn how others are working. Most of the technical discussions where public. Usually on slack or on GitHub (via RFC PRs). If somebody scheduled a meeting usually included the whole team as optional and encouraged juniors to listen even if they can't contribute. We planned our sprints together so everybody know what the team is working on.

On the other hand I joined a new company during the pandemic which had similar issues. I wanted to help solve it, but they didn't even acknowledged it.

Post reply on HN