this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2023
180 points (95.5% liked)

Technology

59377 readers
5843 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Techies are paying $700 a month for tiny bed ‘pods’ in downtown San Francisco::px-captcha

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 41 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Tech workers shouldn't be working from an onsite location unless they're touching hardware...there shouldn't be a central location they're all at anyways.

[–] anti_antidote@lemmy.zip 11 points 1 year ago

I don't know about shouldn't. I think that there should always be the option to work remotely, but I much prefer to work in an office where I can have a separate mental space from home and be able to build meaningful relationships with my coworkers.

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I would love to see incentives to have people work from home in towns that need the population. I think a lot of people would like to live somewhere more rural if they didn't have to commute... but we would need to fix public transportation if we did that. Otherwise we're just adding more cars and miles.

[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

I live rural, and wfh and have been for nearly a decade now. My cars get way less use than when I had to go into the office. Rural doesn't mean more traveling and cars if you're working from home.

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I can’t see the locals in such places taking kindly to any formal program to move people there. We can say “these areas need population” but they will say “it’s driving up rents and they’re a bunch of city slicking tech bros and we hate them.”

The areas that truly, undeniably need population are so bombed-out that no one with any other options will live there.

[–] grahamja@reddthat.com 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Wouldn't it be incredible if smaller tech companies spread out a bit? There are plenty of small towns in America that could use any form of industry to keep them alive.

[–] bamboo@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

There aren’t many skilled workers in those areas though, and you’d need a lot of money to convince people to move to a less desirable area just for you.

[–] BURN@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Not everyone works well remote. I much prefer a hybrid model and honestly wouldn’t even consider working somewhere that’s 100% WFH. All that WFH does for me is decrease how much work I get done and make every waking moment in my home feel like work because I live in a 1 bedroom apartment.

Okay, then be somebody that goes in office?

[–] Loudergood@lemmy.sdf.org -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's nice, rent a co-working space.

[–] BURN@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Hybrid working is completely useless if you’re not in the same space as your coworkers.

I get that some people don’t like working in person, but it’s much easier to get things done and to get short, off the cuff answers without sitting around blocked for 2 hours because nobody will take 2 minutes to answer a question.