Maybe because it might cause psychological issues for people who can't easily connect online and corporations are pricks. I agree that choice would be good thing, but I'm not sure about advertising one as superior to the other.
Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?
451–460 of 508 posts
Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?
#452Earlier quoted context omitted.
It really depends on where you live. My (fortune 100 high tech) job has a 10 minute commute if I hit the lights right. Maybe the "illogical" issue is people living in high density massive population centers. To add, I live on a nice tree-lined street within walking distance of local schools and shopping. I don't live in some apartment near my place of employment.
How easy would be for you to change employer with similar commute?
You know how some people are "40 years with the same company" kind of people? I'm that with the place I live. Over the last 40 years, I've managed to have a strangely broad and deep career, ranging from being an oceanography marine technician to a game developer. Sure, it's not the life of FAANG with golden perks, but maybe that's not what life's all about in high tech?
Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?
#453Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
I think the GP's implication is that maintaining these things at low density is unaffordable, although I haven't looked for any figures to see if there's any truth in this.
Texas is 99% suburbia. TIL we don't have city sewer, water, electricity, and other infra because it's unaffordable.
Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?
#454Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Surely, all of this could only be justified if physical presence had a dramatic impact on productivity. Yet, we cannot tell one way or the other if it actually improves outcomes. You can flip that around too - If remote work was so great for productivity, all companies would switch to it? There really isn't any point arguing over it, because it doesn't change the current state of affairs. My belief is that for remot…
> If remote work was so great for productivity, all companies would switch to it? It's not just about gains in productivity (profit/surplus value) for companies*. It would be enough for remote work to be a net benefit for the whole society. Take the reduction in car traffic, the time savings, the pollution avoided, etc, and subtract an hypotetical loss in profit for capitalists. Still worth it? Then we're doing it! >…
I don't have anything to counter your points, we're in agreement :)
My argument had apriori assumptions for the general audience on HN (VC funded startups, FAANG/MAAMA folks, etc). We can start off with different assumptions, I have no problem with that. Ultimately, I agree that we should change laws as we see fit so everyone can flourish.
Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?
#455Earlier quoted context omitted.
Important to note that wealth doesn't improve your character; it simply amplifies who you already are.
It's also incredibly lonely at times - despite being constantly surrounded by people - which I figure can warp your mind much like too much solitary confinement can. I don't say this from personal experience (un)fortunately, I say this as someone who has a family member that is a confidant of a billionaire from the middle-east (whom I'll refer to as Bob.) The family member is one of their close staff - travels with t…
Half these problems stem from massive income inequalities in society.
The president of the Netherlands famously bikes to work, vs the US president who travels around with a security detail at all times.
> His young children's best friends are their personal body guards - former military personnel that must be present around the clock as a stipulation of their kidknap/ransom insurance.
A problem stemming from income inequality. Organized crimes, such as kidnappings, start to occur in societies so unfair that being part of a crime syndicate seems like a good life choice for people.
If someone with 10 billion wants to feel safer, spend 9 billion improving the QoL in their chosen city. In an society of stark inequality, no amount of money can buy peace of mind, as you point out, money just buys physical security, and being protected from bad things happening is very different than not having to worry about bad things happening at all.
> Bob spends the majority of his birthdays alone, on the phone to my family member, often crying about how lonely he is.
I've had a few "wealthy", not rich, but 8 figure, friends and acquaintances. Perfectly normal house parties. The house is nicer, and the works of art on the wall are real, but nothing crazy. They also didn't flash their wealth around, very low key, nothing special until you opened the door and looked around carefully.
That said, I'm sure another couple 0's on the end of the bank account balance complicate things.
Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?
#456Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep. I'd say the solution is: Live a modest life, and don't advertise your wealth. I doubt there is any law anywhere prohibiting a millionaire or billionaire from moving themselves and their families to a new place and living a middle class lifestyle under a new name. Advertising one's wealth is a signal for "I seek validation" and "Please appreciate me"/"Be my friend because I am wealthy" I doubt anyone is actually…
For starters, the security issue won't go away by moving to a new place and living a middle class lifestyle under a new name, so they still would need to maintain that security staff which would make them obviously not middle class.
> For starters, the security issue won't go away by moving to a new place and living a middle class lifestyle under a new name, so they still would need to maintain that security staff which would make them obviously not middle class.
There are plenty of rich people who are completely unknown.
The inside of their house is a bit better decorated, and if they fly first class to a private resort, how are the neighbors going to know?
Wise people avoid the hedonic treadmill (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedonic_treadmill), independent of their level of wealth.
Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?
#457Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
Even the environmentalists don't care about the environment. 45000 people went to cop27.
I thought they arrested all the environmentalists and only let the politicians attend.
Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?
#458No post body was provided.
Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?
#459Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If remote work was so great for productivity, all companies would switch to it? It's not just about gains in productivity (profit/surplus value) for companies*. It would be enough for remote work to be a net benefit for the whole society. Take the reduction in car traffic, the time savings, the pollution avoided, etc, and subtract an hypotetical loss in profit for capitalists. Still worth it? Then we're doing it! >…
I don't have anything to counter your points, we're in agreement :) My argument had apriori assumptions for the general audience on HN (VC funded startups, FAANG/MAAMA folks, etc). We can start off with different assumptions, I have no problem with that. Ultimately, I agree that we should change laws as we see fit so everyone can flourish.
Nothing against you, I just think it's important to present a different set of assumptions since, as you noted, the general audience of HN tends to see things through specific lens.
When we all just give for discounted that there is only one valid point of view, we lose all the benefits of the discussion and just play reinforcement.
Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?
#460Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think it's that weird, there not a lot of differences between people at the top or at the bottom. It's the fact that they were idealized that makes this dip into their intimacy so strange. But basically, those communications look a lot like ones that I would have with my own friends. And when I was a students, we were careful about spending 10 euros. Now, we have casual chats about buying a sauna for the gard…
It's interesting that you start your post by demythifying these people only to close it by rebuilding the myth again. It's like we can't accept they are just like us posting on HN.
It's not building the myth but explaining the clear difference.
I'm not as conscientious or as laser focused as Elon Musk so my chances of getting there are lower.