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

37% of jobs in the United States can be performed entirely at home

sciencedirect.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 410 posts

Re: 37% of jobs in the United States can be performed entirely at home

#401

Post by lukas099 »

cwmoreiras wrote: post #183
lukas099 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I feel employees should get paid for their commutes. This would lead to more pollution, sprawl, and deaths by automobile as people would be incentivized to live further from work.

People are already incentivized to live far from their jobs because of HCOL near their workplaces. Also, it would be nice if people's choices were as binary as this line of thinking seems to suggest. It seems to me that many people would rather have a shorter commute either way.

> People are already incentivized to live far from their jobs because of HCOL near their workplaces.

Yes, and now they would be even more incentivized.

> Also, it would be nice if people's choices were as binary as this line of thinking seems to suggest.

What's your point?

> It seems to me that many people would rather have a shorter commute either way.

Yes. But if further incentivized to have a longer commute, they would (in aggregate).

Re: 37% of jobs in the United States can be performed entirely at home

#402

Post by chrismcb »

mwattsun wrote: post #67

5 of us wrote Microsoft Works for the Macintosh while working at home from 1984 to 1992. Without the internet, we got together as needed to merge code, usually once a month, but sometimes once a week. We talked on the phone. We went to Microsoft once in awhile. It was ideal and worked very well. Maybe it was just our personalities that made it work, but I am astonished that any programmer would rather go into the off…

There are multiple reasons to want to work in an office. Makes it easier to separate home from work. Not having the space at home to work comfortably. Not having the quiet need from a busy and noisy house Being and to interact with others, even if it is just in a social capacity. Of course personally I'd prefer to work from home

Re: 37% of jobs in the United States can be performed entirely at home

#403

Post by rr808 »

iso1631 wrote: post #216
markus_zhang wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With a kid at home I'm very inclined to work in office whenever it allows. I'm also much more productive in office when everything from coffee to food are taken care of. Nowadays I believe WFH is kinda the norm in IT as long as company policy allows. I love the hybrid mode: two days in office to relax, three days at home to help wifie with kid.

> two days in office to relax, three days at home to help wifie with kid. This is not working from home, or working anywhere If you think working from home means you have time to "help with the kid", you're wrong.

Have you tried actually doing that though. When you're at home you're always available to help out. If you're at the office its impossible. When your family is having a screaming argument next door how can you concentrate at home?

Re: 37% of jobs in the United States can be performed entirely at home

#404

Post by jdavis703 »

Apocryphon wrote: post #253
spookthesunset wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup. We are reversing a lot of efforts society put into reducing sprawl. More and more cookie cutter houses built on what was once a forest… taking with it tons of wildlife.

This was already happening prior to WFH spurred by pandemic. Housing prices were sharply increasing in many major cities, causing people to relocate elsewhere due to lack of affordable supply.

That’s not how supply and demand works.

Re: 37% of jobs in the United States can be performed entirely at home

#405

Post by Valakas_ »

heassler wrote: post #192
mwattsun wrote: post #67

5 of us wrote Microsoft Works for the Macintosh while working at home from 1984 to 1992. Without the internet, we got together as needed to merge code, usually once a month, but sometimes once a week. We talked on the phone. We went to Microsoft once in awhile. It was ideal and worked very well. Maybe it was just our personalities that made it work, but I am astonished that any programmer would rather go into the off…

Going to the office means getting to know the people you work with to a meaningful level (there are other opportunities to do that besides meetings, such as having lunch together or going out for a coffee/walk) in a way that is simply not possible when chatting via google meets. But there’s also the increased exposure to serendipity. Unexpected things occur in the office. Maybe you overhear a conversation that makes…

>Going to the office means getting to know the people you work with to a meaningful level (there are other opportunities to do that besides meetings, such as having lunch together or going out for a coffee/walk) in a way that is simply not possible when chatting via google meets.

Who cares? I care about my family and friends. If I match with someone at the office, then it will happen anyway with remote work and I don't need to be force to interact in the hopes of having a better relationship. I work for work, not to socialize. I socialize with people by choice, not by force. And those people are those who I like.

>Unexpected things occur in the office. Maybe you overhear a conversation that makes you think about your career, or during drinks after work you end up discussing a new cool startup idea with colleagues. None of this really happens when you stay at home.

I don't need the unexpected to make me think, thanks. I like to take command of my own life instead of waiting for unexpected wind blows to drive me somewhere or make me think of where I want to go in life. I'm sorry to hear some people need that. Maybe therapy would be good for them. Or, you know, talking with friends.

> Those perks, admittedly, may be hard to understand for the average introverted, socially anxious software dev.

I feel sorry for the people who feel the need to put others down in order to try to prove a point (for which arguments are lacking, and therefore they resort to ad-hominems).

Re: 37% of jobs in the United States can be performed entirely at home

#406

Post by WYepQ4dNnG »

throw0101a wrote: post #400
WYepQ4dNnG wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me being productive means that I can get stuff done in less time, hence I have more time for taking care of myself and my family.

I put in forty hours a week as per my employment contract states. If I'm more or less productive is irrelevant to the amount of time I have to take care of myself or my family. If I have a productive day, I sign off between 4-5 PM. If I have a non-productive day, I sign off between 4-5 PM. If I happen to be more productive it does not mean I get more hours to do stuff in my personal time / get more personal time.

Because I am more productive when working from home, I can easily get the job done in half the time. This means that my manager is happy, and I sign off after lunch and have the rest of the day for myself. That's also why I always try to schedule meetings no later than 1pm.

Re: 37% of jobs in the United States can be performed entirely at home

#407

Post by tnel77 »

silisili wrote: post #95
stevenhubertron wrote: post #63

I don’t hate working in an office. I hate working in an “open plan” office where someone is always interrupting my work.

Same. Seems not too long before people started really hating offices, offices started being designed to make you hate them. Open offices, no walls, 'island concept' which sounds all fun and tropical until you learn it just means you no longer even have your own desk. If companies want people back in offices, make them enticing. Have perks! Imagine everyone getting their own room, with a nice desk and maybe small couc…

Free daycare could get me back in an office. That would be a huge financial perk.

Re: 37% of jobs in the United States can be performed entirely at home

#408

Post by iso1631 »

markus_zhang wrote: post #319
iso1631 wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are working from home, you are working. If you are helping out with the kid, you are not working.

I'm working when I'm working. Still don't get where you are going with this.

You implied you were maintaining a full time job (that's what I understand "hybrid" to mean), rather than having dropped to part time hours.

Re: 37% of jobs in the United States can be performed entirely at home

#409

Post by closeparen »

mantas wrote: post #389
closeparen wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the problem is, since working fully remote means spending about twice as much time in formally scheduled meetings, and those meetings are significantly more draining on Zoom than in person, both I and the people I might socialize with feel a lot more drained at the end of the work day and less interested in doing anything non-vegetative. Previously we would go for dinner or drinks after work pretty often.

Does it? Or is it just some micromanagers who can’t let people go out of their sight? Having worked remotely for a good decade, I see no reason why remote requires more meeting. Currently I have a couple hours of meetings a week.

Yes, it does. A bit late for the thread but here’s open source evidence from Microsoft. Our internal numbers are similar.

> “People have 250 percent more meetings every day than they did before the pandemic,” says Mary Czerwinski, the research manager of the Human Understanding and Empathy group at Microsoft.

https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/archive/2022/04/trip...

Re: 37% of jobs in the United States can be performed entirely at home

#410

Post by cwmoreiras »

lukas099 wrote: post #401
cwmoreiras wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are already incentivized to live far from their jobs because of HCOL near their workplaces. Also, it would be nice if people's choices were as binary as this line of thinking seems to suggest. It seems to me that many people would rather have a shorter commute either way.

> People are already incentivized to live far from their jobs because of HCOL near their workplaces. Yes, and now they would be even more incentivized. > Also, it would be nice if people's choices were as binary as this line of thinking seems to suggest. What's your point? > It seems to me that many people would rather have a shorter commute either way. Yes. But if further incentivized to have a longer commute, they…

That's great, thanks.
Post reply on HN