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

Silicon Valley's "Pronatalists" Killed WFH. The Strait of Hormuz Brought It Back

governance.fyi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 316 posts

Re: Silicon Valley's "Pronatalists" Killed WFH. The Strait of Hormuz Brought It Back

#151

Post by ryandrake »

lizknope wrote: post #144

My comment from a thread last week We saw how much less pollution there was during the pandemic https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/03/04/8110190 ... I worked from home but a few times I needed to go to my parents house during what used to be rush hour. Less than 5% of normal traffic and fuel demand dropped so much that prices were lower. My job went hybrid in 2022 and then return to office full time last…

> Take it one step further and give tax breaks to businesses that let employees work from home and close physical offices.

At this point I'd rather use the stick than the carrot. Make employers 100% shoulder their employees' commute costs. Don't like it? Allow WFH or pay them enough to afford to live close to the office.

Re: Silicon Valley's "Pronatalists" Killed WFH. The Strait of Hormuz Brought It Back

#152

Post by ben_w »

Zigurd wrote: post #131
ben_w wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basically all of human history can be described in similar terms, and it's not melanin-specific. If you can name a historical figure, they were probably some flavour of non-standard mental processing and beliefs. Even just coming up with "marvels that expanded our freedom and made our lives better" is inherently a non-standard position relative to how most people live and think.

What you're saying amounts to: ambitious assholes know they need better PR than people who just get the job done. In principle this is an approach open to anyone, but in modern America, it is just a clique of strange white men.

No, I'm saying oddball philosophies and pseudoscientific beliefs are the default.

Even coming up with the scientific method took millennia, and actually trying to take that seriously is still really unusual in the human species.

It may happen to be a clique of strange mostly white men in the USA, but it would be wrong in both directions to label this under "modern America": the founding fathers of the USA were, by both modern and contemporary standards, more than a bit odd. And that was true at almost every point in US (and indeed world, not just USA) history. And it's not just a uniquely American thing, as anyone who points to, say, the Chinese Great Leap Forward's famine will point out. (And that was just the first example that came to my head, basically everywhere and every-when has something weird to pick up on).

Science is hard. Thinking critically and logically is hard. As Feynman said:

  The first principle is that you must not fool yourself – and you are the easiest person to fool.

Re: Silicon Valley's "Pronatalists" Killed WFH. The Strait of Hormuz Brought It Back

#153

Post by pc86 »

scythe wrote: post #139
fhd2 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What baffles me most about RTO is what it does to romantic partnerships. If both can find career advancing jobs in the same city, that's cool. But what if they can't? The options aren't great: 1. One of them takes a hit on their career for the benefit of the other. 2. Both move to an area with OK-ish jobs for both, sharing the sacrifice. 3. Both take optimal jobs wherever they are and move into a long distance relati…

I have been thinking that this is a reason why the megacities are winning. In the largest cities, a couple can cohabitate and both find jobs. In smaller cities, you have to get lucky, and if one partner's job falls through (which may be unavoidable) then you might have to move! In a one-income household you can live in a city with one industry. Two is a coordination problem. The eleven largest cities have reached esc…

You might be the first person I've ever heard say "Seattle has a favorable climate."

Re: Silicon Valley's "Pronatalists" Killed WFH. The Strait of Hormuz Brought It Back

#154

Post by stevekemp »

hypeatei wrote: post #63
softwaredoug wrote: post #51

If I could afford to live 15 minutes from the office I 100% would go to an office. But housing, transportation, daycare costs make that impractical. If they really want me in the office, companies need to engage on these issues in the metros they live in. They need to clear NIMBY barriers to urban housing, support transit, and good parental leave.

> If I could afford to live 15 minutes from the office I 100% would go to an office. I live ~20 minutes away from my job and you eventually get tired of that, too. Car maintenance, bad weather, bad drivers, etc. grind you down little by little everyday.

I live ~30 minutes from the city center, and the office locations I've had for the past ten years or so.

I enjoy sitting on the tram/bus, reading a book and getting into the "work time now" mindset. Having half an hour to relax, look at the scenery, the people, and so on, is always nice.

Re: Silicon Valley's "Pronatalists" Killed WFH. The Strait of Hormuz Brought It Back

#155

Post by edgyquant »

LiquidSky wrote: post #128
cosmic_quanta wrote: post #52

I will die on this hill: tech firms that mandated 5 days in the office was about soft layoffs, rather than a principled stance on individual performance under WFH. My "evidence" is that trading firms that kept raking in the money, and that benefit from maximum productivity of their employees, still generally have a hybrid work culture.

I know that this is Hacker News and so all rich and important people must be geniuses making only rational moves, but consider the slim possibility that most aren't very good leaders and make poor decisions. Maybe there's some 19D "soft layoff" motivation, but I suspect a large part is just about control and appearance. You spent all that money on offices so workers better be there. And what's the point of having you…

There’s some of that for sure, but also knowledge sharing is easier in person. The question is whether or not it’s that much easier to justify the trade off of in person work. I don’t think so, but even most remote workers I know would agree that in person has a certain collaborative nature that remote lacks.

Re: Silicon Valley's "Pronatalists" Killed WFH. The Strait of Hormuz Brought It Back

#156

Post by deadbabe »

In order for companies to save face, we should rebrand WFH as “fertility days” instead. This way, companies can say they do not have work from home policies and are a full on site shop, however employees have “fertility days” they can use where they are not required to be at the offices, for purposes of encouraging childbirths.

The best employees get more fertility days as a reward, to encourage more such good employees into being born!

Re: Silicon Valley's "Pronatalists" Killed WFH. The Strait of Hormuz Brought It Back

#157

Post by pc86 »

vrganj wrote: post #98
fhd2 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What baffles me most about RTO is what it does to romantic partnerships. If both can find career advancing jobs in the same city, that's cool. But what if they can't? The options aren't great: 1. One of them takes a hit on their career for the benefit of the other. 2. Both move to an area with OK-ish jobs for both, sharing the sacrifice. 3. Both take optimal jobs wherever they are and move into a long distance relati…

It's because there's a lot of overlap between people thinking "those damn lazy workers better get back to the office so they don't slack off" and people thinking "a woman's role is in the household, raising children and cooking". Regressive attitudes tend to not come alone.

"RTO is sexist" is a hell of a take.

Re: Silicon Valley's "Pronatalists" Killed WFH. The Strait of Hormuz Brought It Back

#158

Post by ebiester »

I think the supply shocks is the part of the pro-natalist view that is hardest for me to accept.

My counter-argument: the full expression of human achievement is not genetic; it depends on the resources given to the human; If we accept that someone cannot reach their entire potential if living in poverty, and we accept that a lot of the advantages of rich children are due to the environment and opportunities that wealth provides, then it naturally concludes that we could get all of the advantages that pro-natalists look for by creating a higher standard living for all existing children.

Only when we can provide the sustainable resources for all people on the planet can we accept the idea that we have room for more.

Re: Silicon Valley's "Pronatalists" Killed WFH. The Strait of Hormuz Brought It Back

#159

Post by ryandrake »

helle253 wrote: post #150
hypeatei wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I could afford to live 15 minutes from the office I 100% would go to an office. I live ~20 minutes away from my job and you eventually get tired of that, too. Car maintenance, bad weather, bad drivers, etc. grind you down little by little everyday.

there is a secret 3rd solution that alleviates most of these issues: mass transit

Mass Transit isn't the solution on its own. It needs to be Mass Transit PLUS people living around mass transit stops.

Mass Transit will never, ever, ever work in rural areas where houses are 2-5 miles apart from each other. It would barely work in suburbs, and only certain kinds like bus transit. You're never going to get a subway to work in the suburbs. Mass Transit is great for cities though, we should be building more of it.

Re: Silicon Valley's "Pronatalists" Killed WFH. The Strait of Hormuz Brought It Back

#160

Post by stevekemp »

watwut wrote: post #62
rossdavidh wrote: post #50

"One or two hybrid days per week capture nearly all the fertility upside." That is an interesting point, and not obvious why it would be so. In fact, it kind of calls into question whether the whole relationship is causal. The people who were able to WFH longer were more often in high-income jobs (service workers never got to do it in the first place, it was almost entirely an office worker thing). They were thus mor…

I have kids, so it seems obvious to me. It is much easier to coordinate kids related duties when at least one is at home every day. Things like, picking the kids up, taking them somewhere, being there when the kid comes home. When the kid is sick and not in school daycare, that one person can do supervision. A sick kid usually does not need super involved care whole day, but they cant be left alone whole day either.

When I had a sick baby I could work from home quite happily, but after he grew to be a toddler or older I don't even try.

If my kid is sick I stay home and look after him, sure half the time they'll be sleeping/reading, but the other half the time its just constant interruptions and caring for him.

At least I'm lucky that I'm allowed about ten paid "care of sick child" days a year.

Post reply on HN