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

Why Do We Still Commute?

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 400 posts

Re: Why Do We Still Commute?

#391

Post by EliRivers »

bartedinburgh wrote: post #375
EliRivers wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"If your job is well defined, e.g. make an app or a website design, you can do it anywhere in the world." That's the OP's exact words. Inspecting a ship hull is clearly defined, yet I cannot do it in my living room. Likewise mopping the floors at MacDonald's. Very clearly defined, yet cannot be done anywhere in the world; I have to go to the actual floor that needs mopping.

You are right. In my original post I implicitly meant office jobs (software in particular). I kept that assumption implicit because I understood that the article was concerned with jobs that had the potential to be done remotely and thus save you the commute time. Mopping floors does not have the remote potential in the first place, while some (most?) office jobs do.

I thank you for your clear and helpful amplifying remarks, delivered without snark or otherwise unhelpful edge. I must confess that over time here on HN, I have become aware that many posters seem to consider only a very small section of the economy (and indeed, a very small part of technology) when making general statements, and I do find myself erring on the side of assuming people have not considered the ninety-something percent of jobs that do not involve making web pages and web apps. Mea culpa.

Re: Why Do We Still Commute?

#392

Post by mnemicmeme »

user15672 wrote: post #355
BjoernKW wrote: post #14

I think that the 'importance of face-to-face interaction' argument is a helplessly contrived one, an attempt to avoid the elephant in the room. There are plenty of examples that show that working remotely without daily face-to-face interaction can work very well. What's markedly different about environments that successfully adopted remote work are aspects like: - a lack of cargo cult work organisation and office pol…

Calling the argument contrived is really rather immature. It's not contrived, it's very real and important. Please stop being so quick to dismiss those that you disagree with as it's childish at best. You speak of cargo cult, but your entire comment reeks of it. Ok, we understand, you like being able to isolate yourself. That's nice, and I'm glad you found a niche, but it's not the same for the vast majority of jobs…

Working remotely doesn't mean someone is unambitious or antisocial. The ability to focus without interruptions while still communicating/documenting clearly is easier done with remote work (in my experience).

I think you touched on a sad aspect of tech. For anyone to be "ambitious" or to "move above an intermediate level" they essentially have to become managers, which means less technical work. The likelihood of you joining the VP/higher ranks and still working on low level issues, as a respected technical fellow, are low to nill (Google, FB, MS have some positions but otherwise you're filtered into a manager to "move up.").

Your comment about "striving for more" is disrespectful to most developers/engineers.

How are people who spend their entire work days talking to others, but not actually working, "doing more?" I've seen more talkative/social people not getting work done than "antisocial" workers being "unambitious" or stagnant.

Re: Why Do We Still Commute?

#393

Post by synicalx »

dagw wrote: post #9

Because 'we' prefer it? I like going into the office. The morning walk to the office with its clear demarcation between work and not work, the ritual of grabbing a coffee in the morning with some colleagues and catching up on what's happening in their projects even if they're not directly related to anything I'm working on, having a dedicated space and a dedicated computer that's just for work, all those little thing…

I'm so relieved to see I'm not the only person here who likes work to remain at work! Unless you live more than an hour away, or REALLY love your job, I just don't see the attraction to working from home.

When I'm at home I'm specifically not at work, which means I don't do any work, I don't think about work, I don't talk to anyone from work (unless there's an emergency that someone else can't fix).

What I think would be an awesome balance between this, is very small regional shared offices. Just shared office spaces that offer usage of their space as a 'subscription' to businesses, and as part of that subscription you get 24/7 access, a desk, internet, a kitchen etc. That way you don't have to have dirty dirty work things in your house, AND you only have to "commute" to a potentially very local office.

Re: Why Do We Still Commute?

#394

Post by synicalx »

This makes me wonder about how viable it would be to offer some sort of hireable desk-space in remote locations. I'm thinking just a simple office with sit/stand desks, comfy chairs, a kitchen, a bog, and 24/7 access. Takes not much to set up, you could run one out of just about any building, and you could offer it as a service to businesses for their remote and/or travelling staff.

So say you're based in NYC, but you find a great hire who's 2 hours drive away. You could just add that person to your "subscription", flick them over an access card, and they can swipe themselves into the 'Desk as a Service' office just next door to their local Walmart. You know they've got a desk that meets all the zany OHS requirements, insurance is taken care of, internet/power are business grade, and if they fancy moving then that's no problem either.

Personally, I hate the idea of working from home. I don't want anything work related in my house, and I like having face-to-face interactions with people rather than just being by myself 24/7. Working in a shared office addresses all that + makes the potential compliance/OHS/insurance issues of having someone work from home very easy to tick off.

Re: Why Do We Still Commute?

#395

Post by PeterStuer »

Torkgin wrote: post #369
PeterStuer wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Closer tot he truth: they are scared that the 'managing' is actually not realy needed and contributing all that much.

This makes me wonder, is it truly so? Every organization starts without managers and they are added later once the organization grows but if they are not really needed, why is every organization adding them?

That is a realy good question. I don't know whether there is a clear answer. How come efficient passionate startups eventually end up as rent-seeking slothful bureaucratic mega-corporations. When does that 'start' to happen?

It is not just 'cargo-cult' or 'enterprise-envy'. I think it goes deeper. My current feeling is that middle management is something that is naturally lurking in the wings, and expresses itself the moment the overhead can be carried. Caricatured: Bottom up there's people looking for a way to escape 'working at the coalface', and start the innate pecking order/ hierarchy battles. Top down there is the desire of the owner to create some distance, and in many cases also the latent idea that if some proficiencies could be isolated into a single specialist, the remaining 'resources' could be sourced cheaper. It self reinforces since as 'overhead' the middle management layer crates make-work to assert its existence. Furthermore, it asserts the 'company as a value funnel', since it is a model that disemancipates each individual making sure they can't easily venture out on their own.

So the middle management pattern could be an expression waiting to happen as a result of natural forces, not as a result of direct 'needs' or 'efficiency' in value creation in its own right, but just for the sake of 'enterprise creation' itself.

Re: Why Do We Still Commute?

#396

Post by burntsushi »

gozur88 wrote: post #278
burntsushi wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what I do. I commute to Kendall Square in Cambridge, MA. I get into the office at 6:30AM every day and leave by 2:30PM. It's still not a lovely commute---maybe 40 to 50 minutes each way---but it's half the time if I were forced to work 9-5. I pay for this with sleep. It's hard for me to get to sleep before 10PM. :-)

I tried that one job. Invariably managers would schedule meetings at 3:00, or someone would come to my desk at 2:15 with a task that just had to be finished that day.

Yeah it only works if people are willing to respect your time (and you're assertive enough to politely remind them when they forget).

Re: Why Do We Still Commute?

#397

Post by gaastonsr »

notyourday wrote: post #381
gaastonsr wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bad managers IMO. Since their work should be minimize interruptions and facilitate communication inside and across teams.

No, the work of the manager is to do whatever is needed to deliver the result on the task assigned to them, including if necessary decisions to scrap, mothball, reassign, adjust, ignore whatever is happening in the company based on current/future state of the group they manage or based on the situation of the company. That's why they are managers and not low level developers. Developer does not like it? Well, a devel…

That just shows your lack of information on how to manage knowledge workers.

Good managers know how to ship products by knowing how to manage knowledge workers and removing friction in the communication inside and outside the team.

Re: Why Do We Still Commute?

#398

Post by gaastonsr »

notyourday wrote: post #389
BeetleB wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>No, the work of the manager is to do whatever is needed to deliver the result on the task assigned to them You missed the part where the manager has to evaluate and push back if needed. If their primary role is merely to do what their bosses tell them to, then they are not doing any managing.

Fine, call them supervisors. 99% of the companies can replace 75% of the managers with supervisors ( foreman in constructions/manufacturing ) and get a better result. Most of the "teams" inside organizations dont need managers - they need supervisors as organization does not need to have mini fiefdoms.

Except they shouldn't be supervisors, they should be facilitators.

You are missing the point of what a manager is.

Re: Why Do We Still Commute?

#399

Post by wallflower »

jjkk0101 wrote: post #385
jamaicahest wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>There are times where you don't have the energy to stand but need to work - so just sit Then what's the point of not getting a table that can go up and down?

I'd say it's just a matter of budget.

It is really more my perception that with a fixed standing desk, if I want to stop standing, I have to physically move a couple feet to my desk. Since there is no mechanical interlude involved with the desk undergoing a morphing, there is very low "switching cost". Also, I have a very nice desk that I'd still like to use.

Re: Why Do We Still Commute?

#400

Post by kthejoker2 »

rwmj wrote: post #302
socalnate1 wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But this is wrong. It's not an externality for the company. Companies often often go out of their way to reduce this cost. Things like: - Covering the cost of a FastPass - Deciding where to locate a new office based on where employees live - Offering a company shuttle from a train station - "Google Bus" and other similar initiatives - Offering a potential employee a higher salary because of their long commute time Th…

Don't know about the US, but in the UK all those are taxable benefits, so they would reduce employees' take-home pay. BTW I've never heard of a company moving for its employees' benefit, unless by "employees" you mean "senior management & board members".

Here in Houston most of the major petchems have satellite offices in the suburbs (often multiple) to support their workers.
Post reply on HN