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

Let People Move to Jobs

jefftk.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 314 posts

Re: Let People Move to Jobs

#171

Post by humanrebar »

cowsandmilk wrote: post #146
systematical wrote: post #57

The article mentions DC and I'd just like vent about how miserable a place this is to live in. I see some people spend 10 hours a week and often more just commuting to work. It's overpriced. And when you look at the state of IT in the federal government you realize why this government fails so badly at non-tech things. I'll be running away from the major cities as fast as possible as soon as possible. Yuck. You actua…

> You actually lose money working in DC, the salaries aren't even worth. People around DC have such low salaries that they are among the richest counties in the country... https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/censu...

That just proves that there's a certain class of rich people (diplomats? lawyers?) that have plenty of work in the D.C. area and they've carved some neighborhoods out for themselves. It doesn't prove anything about what life for a DBA in D.C. would be like.

Re: Let People Move to Jobs

#172

Post by humanrebar »

ozim wrote: post #95
atemerev wrote: post #68

I wonder why 100% remote positions and companies are still marginal. Software engineering is one of the few industries where remote work is possible, and yet hardly available, despite obvious advantages.

Because remote is hard, if it would be just about typing code then yes you could live in igloo in Greenland. You need people who are able to work remotely together. It is not only about having really smart devs who can grasp how to do Y with tech Z. It is also about having really smart managers and really smart company owners. Building such a team takes years, it is not like you can hire 10 devs, a manager and dump l…

> Because remote is hard, if it would be just about typing code then yes you could live in igloo in Greenland.

So is writing maintainable code with actual documentation, etc. And I find that there's a lot of overlap between good remote work and that sort of development.

It's a lot hard to slap together undocumented spaghetti and then hand it off to a coworker if you can't bring them over, point at a monitor, and redraw the UML diagram for the eighteenth time with dry erase marker.

Re: Let People Move to Jobs

#173

Post by ChuckNorris89 »

icebraining wrote: post #103
ljf wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This - and to add to that, the high value of this social capital when you have lower financal capital. Someone to help with the kids, relax with, help you fix your car, have a cheap evening or weekend of hanging out with. When you move it can take years to build all that up again. You might be able to do without it all, but you either have to pay to replace it or go without.

But that implies we should centralize in cities, so people don't have to move if they lose their jobs. Getting a few companies to a small town just means that when one fails, workers are more likely to have to move at a later stage in life, when they already have kids and a mortgage and such. Better for them to move to a hub when they're young. Plus their children will already be born in a hub, so they won't have to…

I agree with what you said but how many people can afford to have families in hubs like you assume?

Re: Let People Move to Jobs

#174

Post by humanrebar »

titanomachy wrote: post #59
m0zg wrote: post #54

For most of us here, there's no reason to move anywhere at all. Programmers can work from anywhere in the world. We need to let go of the idea that "work" means 2 hours of commute and sitting in an open plan under constant barrage of interruptions for 40 hours a week. We need to let go of _all_ the components of this definition, from "40 hours" to "office" to "commute". There are jobs which have to be done in the off…

Maybe it's because I'm relatively young, but I actually like working in an office. I bike 15 minutes to work rather than commuting 2 hours, because my work pays me enough to live close by. I spend some of my time collaborating closely with smart people who are a lot more experienced than me, which seems to be the fastest way to learn. I spend then rest of the time with headphones on facing the corner of the open offi…

> I bike 15 minutes to work rather than commuting 2 hours, because my work pays me enough to live close by.

For now. Unless you marry another professional, it will be difficult to keep that commute if you decide to start a family.

Part of the problem with the Bay Area and NYC is that it's cradle-to-grave unsustainable. That's not to say people don't make it work, but it's unlikely that the average tech worker in those places has replacement-level fertility or will hang around the area with their kids and grandkids to form a multi-generation household.

Re: Let People Move to Jobs

#175

Post by scythe »

esotericn wrote: post #153

The whole idea of remote working to arbitrage cost of living falls apart if you are in any way social. I think that a lot of people banging on about remote work just haven't tried it for an extended period. It works for some, and for those - great. To me, it's just another step down the 'technification' of everything in which people don't speak to the people around them (because they've been 'removed' from their live…

> The whole idea of remote working to arbitrage cost of living falls apart if you are in any way social. [...] I don't want to live in the middle of nowhere and earn 10x what the average local does. I want the people around me to be roughly on my level and share my interests.

I don’t really prefer to make all of my friends within the tech/academic bubble that I work in. I would feel weird if I didn’t see my coworkers, but I’ve made a point of finding activities that bring me into contact with a range of different people, and I think that makes my social life more interesting.

I was lucky enough to choose a career (medical physics) that takes place everywhere, but I could see remote work being effective for people in other fields.

Re: Let People Move to Jobs

#176

Post by dx87 »

esotericn wrote: post #153

The whole idea of remote working to arbitrage cost of living falls apart if you are in any way social. I think that a lot of people banging on about remote work just haven't tried it for an extended period. It works for some, and for those - great. To me, it's just another step down the 'technification' of everything in which people don't speak to the people around them (because they've been 'removed' from their live…

That's been my experience as well. I've worked remote for a few years and love it because I'm fine without the social aspect of work, but most of the people I know left their remote job in under a year because it felt lonely and isolating. Anecdotally, it seems like married people and homeowners tend to like remote work because they have extra free time and a spouse to talk to, whereas the single people I know would quickly start doing their remote work at Starbucks or pubs with free WiFi because it's the only way they'll see another person during the work week.

Re: Let People Move to Jobs

#177

Post by codekansas »

There's at least one large tech company that has located themselves totally outside the typical tech hubs - Epic Systems, in Madison. I interviewed for them after graduation but ended up taking a job at Facebook in Seattle.

The offer was for half my current salary. They tried to argue that with the cost of living adjustment I could buy a house, but what 22-year-old wants to buy a house? Locating in Madison is kind of a physical manifestation of their business strategy - avoid any competition, pay sub-market rates and issue strict, possibly non-enforceable non-compete clauses.

It works for people who really want to live in the Midwest. I think there's a spectrum between "live to work" and "work to live", and I think most ambitious college grads actually want many opportunities, for a while at least.

Re: Let People Move to Jobs

#178

Post by abnry »

esotericn wrote: post #165
gurkendoktor wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The whole idea of remote working to arbitrage cost of living falls apart if you are in any way social. Unless you grew up in the area from which you work remotely, in which case you can be more social because connecting with old friends and family is much easier than making new friends at 30+. > If I earned a London salary in my hometown I'd be ostracising myself completely from those around me [...] I don't see ho…

Yeah, and all of those guys are skint and you're not. It works to an extent. Perhaps you don't see the problem because you're theorizing about it rather than having lived experience. As I think most people do. Imagine that essentially everyone you meet in your age group is far poorer than you are. Not most people but everyone. You need some sort of 'app' to find people to speak to who are on your level. Your specific…

"On your level" just screams pretentiousness. Since when is money the measure of a man anyways?

Re: Let People Move to Jobs

#179

Post by foxhop »

I work remotely for the past 6 years and will likely never have an office job again.

I live in my home town and have worked for start ups in Santa Monica, San Francisco, Boston, and New York.

I live in Eastern Connecticut, which is the side on the state that people often do not know about. It's a 2.5 hour drive to New York or Boston. It's not as affluent as the weat side, close to New York.

I do a lot of gardening when the weather permits.

https://russell.ballestrini.net/how-to-work-from-home-the-ro...

Re: Let People Move to Jobs

#180

Post by [deleted] »

abnry wrote: post #178
esotericn wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, and all of those guys are skint and you're not. It works to an extent. Perhaps you don't see the problem because you're theorizing about it rather than having lived experience. As I think most people do. Imagine that essentially everyone you meet in your age group is far poorer than you are. Not most people but everyone. You need some sort of 'app' to find people to speak to who are on your level. Your specific…

"On your level" just screams pretentiousness. Since when is money the measure of a man anyways?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN