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

How Paul Graham Is Wrong

ma.tt

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 206 posts

Re: How Paul Graham Is Wrong

#111

Post by [deleted] »

diydsp wrote: post #99
cgh wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Harder problems than the Linux kernel? I've been remote for eight years now and I work on a codebase so huge that no one person understands it all beneath the 10,000 foot level. Nearly all of us are remote (only the managers are "local" to San Jose). Once a quarter we get together and meet up, coming from Vancouver, Toronto, Bangalore, Colorado and northern California.

> the Linux kernel? Although it's insanely technically challenging, many computer science projects are more difficult than the Linux kernel to do remotely. For example, watching users interact with the software, anything that involves expensive test equipment, anything that runs on embedded/custom hardware.

[deleted]

Re: How Paul Graham Is Wrong

#112

Post by zippergz »

jasode wrote: post #38

>Use WordPress and P2, use Slack, use G+ Hangouts, use Skype, use any of the amazing technology that allows us to collaborate as effectively online as previous generations of company did offline. I've been a 100% remote worker for 5+ years but I think we have to be honest here. All those teleconferencing/videoconferencing/virtualwhiteboards/etc are not as effective as everyone sharing the same physical workspace. Yes…

I feel the same way. I have lived in a tech hub city and worked on-site for major tech companies. I now live in a non-tech hub, with very few technology jobs to choose from, but I live here for personal quality of life reasons. Since I've lived here, I've worked both remotely and on-site for a few different companies. Selfishly, I'd like to see far more companies allow remote workers, because it would give me so many more job opportunities. But I also have to admit that my experience is that overall team/company productivity is markedly better when the people are all in the same location. I know that there are exceptions, but I really don't think they're the norm.

Re: How Paul Graham Is Wrong

#113

Post by davidw »

falcolas wrote: post #76
jasode wrote: post #38

>Use WordPress and P2, use Slack, use G+ Hangouts, use Skype, use any of the amazing technology that allows us to collaborate as effectively online as previous generations of company did offline. I've been a 100% remote worker for 5+ years but I think we have to be honest here. All those teleconferencing/videoconferencing/virtualwhiteboards/etc are not as effective as everyone sharing the same physical workspace. Yes…

As another veteran of working remotely, I disagree. Conscious use of collaboration tools offsets not being in the same office together nicely. Real time communication via Hangouts or Skype are at a level where you can hold a good conversation without having to be in the same physical location. Also, most offices (and businesses) are not really built to support proper collaboration and working conditions. As an exampl…

> Real time communication

That implies a time zone with a lot of overlap. Rome/Berlin time is 9 hours ahead of San Francisco, meaning there really isn't a lot of overlap.

Real time communication also means that you need to consciously set up the call and pay attention to it. Sometimes I overhear something at work, or we talk about something interesting at lunch, or there's an "oh shit" moment (not often:-) when it's really convenient to have everyone jump in.

I've been doing open source and IRC and 'the internet' for more or less 20 years, so I'm pretty comfortable with the whole thing, and happy with it, but when there is a sense of urgency, it can sometimes be less efficient.

Re: How Paul Graham Is Wrong

#114

Post by snowwrestler »

The topics of remote work and of immigration reform seem unrelated to me.

A better immigration system would be better for the U.S., in that it would allow the best programmers to come here if they want to. That is clearly better for the U.S. as a whole, since it would make it easier to raise the national technical talent level relative to other nations. These new Americans would hopefully become citizens, raise families, vote, sit on school boards, run for elected office, start companies, etc.--improving the nation from within over time with their perspectives, talents, desires, and hard work (as past generations of immigrants have).

Contracting with foreign workers through the Internet does not achieve any of those long-term national goals.

Once new workers are legally within the U.S., I agree that they should have the freedom to choose remote work if they want to, or colocating work if they want to.

Re: How Paul Graham Is Wrong

#115

Post by [deleted] »

wglb wrote: post #77
photomatt wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because someone is on a different kind of contract (say a monthly retainer paid by wire, versus employee of US company paid with direct deposit) doesn't mean you need to treat them differently. Every "Automattician" at Automattic is viewed the same regardless of how their employment contract happens to work, and as you scale larger you can set up subsidiaries overseas to directly employ people. (We look at this…

I have done about half my career as a 1099 or equivalent. There is no question that those are treated differently.

[deleted]

Re: How Paul Graham Is Wrong

#116

Post by jkmcf »

rumcajz wrote: post #92
jasode wrote: post #38

>Use WordPress and P2, use Slack, use G+ Hangouts, use Skype, use any of the amazing technology that allows us to collaborate as effectively online as previous generations of company did offline. I've been a 100% remote worker for 5+ years but I think we have to be honest here. All those teleconferencing/videoconferencing/virtualwhiteboards/etc are not as effective as everyone sharing the same physical workspace. Yes…

Having experienced different setups, it seems that collaboration is OK if everyone is at the same place. It's also OK is everyone is remote. Where it gets troublesome is when part of the team is collocated and part is remote. What you get is two unequal classes of employees which leads to all kinds of problems.

I work part time remotely, and we have other devs full time remote. I definitely feel like I'm "missing out" just being OOO part time, be it the hoc discussions or just going out for beers.

Of course, it only matters if you let it matter. Some people don't care or need that stuff. They worry about their own work and leave work at work, which I'm working on doing :)

Re: How Paul Graham Is Wrong

#117

Post by tracker1 »

falcolas wrote: post #79
hckr1292 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Videoconferencing sucks -- it's not as effective as having your coworker come over to your screen for pair programming, or talking face-to-face with your UXer. Anyone who has done any amount of remote work will realize that the OP is dramatically overstating the value of teleconferencing solutions compared to working in house.

Videoconferencing _used_ to suck. Four years ago, having a voice conversation while sharing a screen was neigh on impossible. Now, however, it's dirt simple and works really well.

I'm kind of split... I think it depends on your home environment. Spouse, kids, other distractions? Sometimes the workplace has fewer distractions than home.

Re: How Paul Graham Is Wrong

#118

Post by geetarista »

Under jasode's thread, you can see that people are missing Paul's point. He's not saying that working with close proximity is the "best" way of working. Yet most people here are debating which type of work is. Each company, market, vertical, team, etc. will vary in manifold ways.

What I believe Paul is asking for is that companies have the option to choose. Right now the option is available to anyone to hire remotely in one way or another. This is not the case with physically hiring into the country. Almost every startup I've worked at has had issues trying to hire exceptional people from another country. In almost every case, we lost those hires to the system and were forced to start the search again.

If a small, remote, international startup grows fast enough and they decide that working together under one roof in the U.S. fits their new needs, they should have the freedom and choice to do so.

Re: How Paul Graham Is Wrong

#119

Post by mcfunley »

I just finished a remote job search. I'm in Los Angeles, and most of the companies I talked to were in SF. I had previously worked remotely for a company in New York (Etsy), and I was honestly really surprised how hostile SF companies were to the idea. I was mostly going through personal connections, so I assume that I was getting the gigantic break of having a solid recommendation that most people can't get. (I feel bad about this, but it is what it is.)

I have been on both sides of remote work, so I totally get that it's not a slam dunk. It works a lot better for companies that have a strong culture established in a home base, and it works a lot better for experienced folks than green college hires. I have shut down the interview process myself when I felt like working remotely wouldn't work out at particular companies.

Even given all of that, I was pretty amazed how quickly some of the conversations got shut down. No remotes, we don't care who you are or what your experience is. I didn't talk to any companies outside of SF that were that quick to say no.

FWIW I landed at Stripe, which in fairness is probably one of the companies pg had in mind when writing his original article. I agree with the spirit of this, and I also don't really agree with a lot of things in pg's essay. But the particulars here might be totally wrong. At least one company in his network is really remote friendly.

Re: How Paul Graham Is Wrong

#120

Post by walshemj »

jfaucett wrote: post #74
walshemj wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So self employed people in Germany cannot set up their own company and pay the social security tax that way and build up an entitlement to benefits? Would take me less than a week to do that in the UK for a PLC.

I think this would be possible, but then again it would also mean you the employee would have to setup your own company to be able to work remotely for another one, and although the UG cost only 1 euro to start, you need to set aside 25% of yearly earnings until obtaining the base 25k for ensuring your newly founded company (GmbH). So this means a lot of hastle for what? The remote companies would need to offer serio…

Move to the UK and set up a PLC here would be one solution - I did not realise that self employment was so hedged around with red tape in Germany.
Post reply on HN