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

191–200 of 206 posts

Re: How Paul Graham Is Wrong

#191

Post by nicktix »

jleyank wrote: post #162
larrys wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"are not as effective as everyone sharing the same physical workspace. Yes, they do help mitigate many issues of isolation and they do help collaboration but there's still some "bandwidth loss" when people are not in the same room or even down the hall from each other." Agree. Which, in fact, was one of the reasons that both Bell Labs and the Manhattan Project achieved what they did. (For sure a different time which…

"Which, in fact, was one of the reasons that both Bell Labs and the Manhattan Project achieved what they did." Err, no. The Manhattan Project succeeded because it has most of the available physicists of the world, a blank-check budget, top priority and rather severe real-world pressure. No startup idea will ever have that kind of staff...

+1

Re: How Paul Graham Is Wrong

#192

Post by nicktix »

onedev wrote: post #90
7Figures2Commas wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Part of the problem is that investors might understand the businesses they invest in from 30,000 feet, but they frequently have no idea how their portfolio companies are actually run. If some of them went undercover and applied for jobs at their own portfolio companies, they'd probably have a different perspective about the "talent shortage."

They'd probably get rejected for jobs at their own portfolio companies. That's how out of whack hiring is.

Yes. As a job search candidate myself, I see your point. It was not as it used to be before. Maybe something to do with a lot more competition and focus on competitive programming in interviews may be?

Re: How Paul Graham Is Wrong

#195

Post by datashovel »

datashovel wrote: post #194

I read the PG article as a "grass is always greener" argument.

I just read the footnote:

[1] How much better is a great programmer than an ordinary one? So much better that you can't even measure the difference directly....

You do not get to hire those people. And if you do it's on their terms. Perhaps you get to invest in their ideas if you're lucky.

Re: How Paul Graham Is Wrong

#196

Post by choppaface »

choppaface wrote: post #95

I've worked both onsite and remote as a software dev / data engineer. I started out onsite. There are major disadvantages to remote work: * Amount you learn from the office community is orders of magnitude lower than onsite. If you're good at pushing yourself to learn new things, that can help, but your knowledge will almost certainly end up less diversified living remotely. You're just not exposed to the company's t…

Downvotes because I insulted pg or because I argued remote was bad??

Re: How Paul Graham Is Wrong

#197

Post by aredridel »

YuriNiyazov wrote: post #87
dang wrote: post #64

The article assumes its conclusion: > amazing technology that allows us to collaborate as effectively online as previous generations of company did offline That's a huge claim, and it's disputable. For example, I've worked both ways a lot and find remote work to be dramatically less effective. If you accept the claim, then sure, the startups PG was writing about are missing the obvious, and for the most ironic of rea…

What you say about the article may very well be true, but the surrounding discussion is not as bad as that. I recognize that the problems pointed out by PG ("chance meetings") and others are genuine problems that haven't yet been solved by technology. However, what I object to is that the rallying cry (and a lot of PG's essays are now rallying cries for how the industry should be, even if he just thinks "I'm just a d…

Twitter = chance meetings as a platform.

Re: How Paul Graham Is Wrong

#198

Post by learnstats2 »

drawkbox wrote: post #56
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…

So as a remote worker, you would be more productive in the office 5 days a week? If everyone on the team has a 2 hour commute, that is a guarantee that there will be less time available to the individual and thus the team. Commutes are a big problem aside from the communication. I have also found that companies that do remote or allow it, just communicate better, to all parties, even clients or stakeholders. They are…

"If everyone on the team has a 2 hour commute, that is a guarantee that there will be less time available to the individual and thus the team."

I am willing to sacrifice 2-4 hours of personal time per day commuting => I am willing to sacrifice myself to the company's wishes => I am a 'good employee'

A portion of the advantage of office work comes down to employer control of employee. The differing communication systems with clients, customers and stakeholders illustrate the different balances of power accurately.

As such, I agree that remote companies make for more robust teams if they do it right - but it's much harder to do it right.

Remote companies lose some advantage of easy communication (in order to survive as a remote, you have to be better at communication), and you lose some advantage of having a clearly indicated power structure.

Re: How Paul Graham Is Wrong

#199

Post by meanv »

ryandvm wrote: post #80
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…

Agreed. I don't have a solution, but this frustrates me to no end. As a software engineer that previously worked in an open floor plan I can testify that they absolutely crush individual productivity. Headphones are no solution. I think I'd need a potato sack on my head too. But as a software engineer that currently works with geographically distributed teams, there's no way to deny that certain elements of communica…

hand raised I have been doing 4 days remote, 1 at the office for 7 years. I live 150 miles from the office. That once a week face time is very helpful.

I haven't read the entire thread of comments, but as I read about the mishmash of remote tools, I'll throw in an endorsement for Microsoft Lync. The full blown integration of email, video, audio, screenshare works really well.

Re: How Paul Graham Is Wrong

#200

Post by dvo19 »

As I work remotely, it is the best. I think it is up to the individual. If the individual does not want to work, he or she does not want to work regardless at home or at the work place.
Post reply on HN