Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | JambalayaJimbo's comments login

The construction industry would collapse as buying confidence would disappear. Buildings with large amounts of renters would likely fall into disarray over the long term.

Are you saying that basically all co-ops are inept? I’m not saying they’re perfect but many do just fine.

Co-ops that are involved in building apartments? They're so few they're irrelevant. It still needs the members to put in a fair amount of money - likely a lot more than the average renter can afford. And it requires "decent" members.

Try being a landlord for the "median" renter, and you'll see how many irresponsible people are out there. A lot of below median folks have zero interest in maintaining their place - even if they own it. They'd make for very poor co-op members.


This is nonsense. The vast majority of landlords have to work a day job in order to finance the property in the first place.

Sure but many groups of people work to service debt, such as the purchase of a house, education, medical expense or a small business loan. Demonstrating that landlords are not all of the leisure class is insufficient to imply they are equally living hard scrabble working lives compared to the population writ large.

the vast majority of landlords are small potatoes not worth talking about. understand that, when people talk about landlords, they're probably talking about the landlords of the vast majority of rentals.

Career focused younger people have also been adversely affected by wfh for the last few years in a big way. All the mentorship and networking opportunities have withered. The non career focused younger people are living it up though.

I think they’re adversely affected only if their managers or companies make no effort to find an alternative. Many have no issue. This just seems like the weak justification Andy Jassy has repeatedly pointed to.

> mentorship and networking opportunities

All this is just made up bullshit though.


Do you have any substantial evidence to support your claim, apart from the strong language?

No just strong language.

I’ve been based at home for 14 years now.

It’s not bullshit. It’s perhaps exaggerated, and many of the “work from a desk in a specific building” people are the ones who can’t mentor them anyway, but there are benefits in

It doesn’t have to be, you can mentor people in a fully remote environment, but it’s far harder for most ok both sides - especially for young people and people on HN that think WFH means you don’t actually have to work.


Why is it harder to mentor people remotely? Just call them, have a chat, share your screens, drink some tea. It's not rocket science, and I have done it many times with colleagues.

One could even have the occasional face to face meeting, at the office, at either party's home, at the lab, the shop floor, at a co-working space, or even just at a cafe or bar.

What prevents them from networking remotely and scheduling coffee chats? That seems like a weak excuse.

I would never have received the career support I did online. I’m so lucky I got into software engineering before remote work was a thing.

As a senior engineer, I benefit from remote work. But it’s sad to see those informal lunches replaced with Zoom “coffee.”


This is exactly it. The few years I had in office were an amazing foundation for my career. I see the same in those who started around the same time I did. Most of my team who was hired remotely are struggling.

The realities of how humans interact. Going for a cup of coffee and asking a colleague to join is a different act than asking a colleague to join you in a Zoom call.

It just doesn't happen, and chatting over VC isn't the same as meeting people in real life anyway. In the office, I'll randomly bump into people I've known from years back and have small chats, but I never in a million years would have specifically scheduled to do so (sometimes I don't even remember their names, just what they look like!).

The office broadcast conversations can be a mali and boni. Sometimes you get updated by a background conversation- sometimes you get distracted by a conversation. It would be great if you could auto-flag a conversation you have on teams as relevant for others or not - and it would just start playing merged into the music of others remote, one way.

This wouldn't work for me because I don't listen to anything when I'm working. You're making the assumption that everyone is just constantly listening to music, but I focus best with silence and with my ears unencumbered. I suppose it would be doable with desktop speakers that would only play something when remotely triggered, but then there's the secondary issue that I'm not always at my desk, vs in the office people can obviously see who's there and who's listening in (and easily go grab someone else to join in as necessary). There's just way less friction to conversations when people are in the same room.

It works to an extent. True bonding comes from being shoulder to shoulder in extreme situations under shared duress.

As long as we understand that "true bonding" is preciously close to "no true Scotsman galaxy" :-)

Let's stop pretending that remote work is new. I've worked remotely on and off from the beginning of my career. Majority of my mentors have been remote, at least two of whom I've never met "on real life" - one of whom shared tremendous technical experience over 18 months we worked together three provinces away, other who has taught me corporate life and consulting skills from four provinces away (I'm in Canada, think states:).

I've spent four years as ops manager recently on a troubled project and I agree thay extreme situations under shared duress can build a specific, very strong kind of bond (not the only kind, mind you!). It's just that physical presence is completely orthogonal to it.

I have a hard time believing all this concern is for "young generation and their social and mentoring opportunities". Young generation grew up with remote and social networking infused in their lives (for better or for worse, separate conversation :)! If a senior person doesn't know how to mentor or communicate remote, let's be upfront on that and discuss it openly and coach them. But let's not blame the "juniors" for that :-).


> It works to an extent. True bonding comes from being shoulder to shoulder in extreme situations under shared duress.

People say this, but "this is the kind of true bonding experiences with which I'm familiar" isn't the same as "this is the only way true bonding can occur." I'm certainly old enough to remember the dismissive scoffing in the '90s that true friendships are made only in person, not with people online.


Personally, I have been in these situations remotely too (everybody in a call, screen shared, parallel things going on). I don't get why it has to be physical.

What you are describing is "trauma bonding" - maladaptation of human brain that makes us stay in bad conditions/situations. It is evolutionary adaptation in life and death situation you can not escape, but what you described is not that.

Seriously? I mean to a certain extent you are correct that it's just an excuse...

But if you really think there is no difference between these two things then you are living in a fantasy world.

Proximity does a lot to encourage socialization between super senior people and super junior people.

Without proximity, it's much easier for either side to put off or brush off things that would be good mentorship opportunities. You don't have to go into work the next day and see your coworker face to face to explain why you ditched them on that pair coding session or whatever it may have been.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: