people dont want to pay 2 rents for no reason though, unless the rents are very cheap, so they won't be able to price these things high anymore. probably
Rents for this would be work from home space would have to be modest. Gym membership rates would probably most fair. The equinox priced areas will be painted smoke grey with dark wood desks, and be stocked with instacup coffee. The snap fitness type place will be like your high school library, and will be good enough for me if I have a few square feet of desk and a monitor.
There is no middle ground -- WFH is self-reinforcing trend, because offices are much less useful when they are half-empty and all processes have go online. As soon as some coworkers move, others follow. If people start working 2-3 days at home ... they start to think about moving somewhere better. I wonder what is the endgame of this rearrangement? Perhaps nomadism will become common? But in that case, cities will lose even more cohesion than they ve lost so far. If we take away the work factor, the question "where do i/my family live" becomes much more open-ended. Obvious choice #1 is near extended family. What else motivates people to move?
I tend to agree in that coming in only one or two days a week gives you some greater flexibility in where you live, but only some. For a lot of people whose companies are in expensive urban areas, WFH a few days per week means they need more housing than they might otherwise need but they can't move somewhere that's cheaper/preferable.
And while teams can coordinate time in the office, the more people are mostly remote the less value there is in others coming in.
>Obvious choice #1 is near extended family. What else motivates people to move?
They like the environment more? I work with someone who just ditched their downtown city apartment and bought a place on the coast of Maine.
I don't think it's anywhere near as bimodal as you say.
As far as human pyschology goes, I think it's hard to be productive over the very long term with almost no real in-person time to connect with your team. We're social animals and we bond best when together. And we are more productive and efficient when we have bonded in that way.
Even famously all-remote companies shell out cash to fly everyone together at least a few times a year because of this. At some point, though, there are diminishing returns to getting everyone in the same room. The optimum point surely varies from person to person and depends on the nature of their work, but I don't think the peak is "every day" or "never".
Yes, offices are less useful when they're empty half the time. But homes are too! Most American homes sit empty from 8am-6pm every single day. Miles and miles of dead suburban streets, empty driveways, houses silent except for the ticking of thermostats.
I'm interested to see a company try a middle ground like this: Everyone works from home most days. At some periodic interval, maybe once a week, everyone comes to some shared space for meeting and coordination work.
This sounds like the worst of both worlds because you need both home office space and office space. But the office space can likely be shared with several teams. An office big enough for 100 people could service a 1,000 if teams only came in once every two weeks. If in-person days are mostly around meetings and communication, you don't need a lot of dedicated desk space. It doesn't need to feel like a permanent "territory" for each worker. Instead, just a pile of shared meeting rooms and open spaces.
If you still have to come in a few times, then it sounds like you're still stuck living close to an urban center. But, actually, the livable radius increases dramatically. A one-hour each way commute is a nightmare if you do it every day. That's ten hours a week stuck in a car. But if you only come in once every two weeks, then you could cut your total commute time in half while living five times as far away. And, since in-person days are mostly for meeting anyway, it's viable to have an understanding that commuting is part of your "work day" and have a shorter in-person work day.
In return, you get to spend less time commuting and more time in your own community, with your pets, with your loved ones, and in your own home.
>almost no real in-person time to connect with your team
I work on a very distributed team and, in normal times, we just physically get together in one of our offices or in conjunction with some event a lot of people are attending anyway a few times a year. Most of us (normally) travel a good part of the time anyway so it's really not especially disruptive.
I actually agree that remote teams should have some real F2F time but that needn't mean living within commuting distance of a common office.
I’m not sure I agree here. I struggle with the assumption that all processes can go online without any loss of value. For some jobs this might be possible, but the more a job is not just about realizing clearly articulated requirements, the more this will be difficult. Hence, companies will expect a pay cut for the loss in productivity. Again, I believe there is a great middle ground to be found that leverages the strengths of both worlds
The web already had solved that problem, even with bootstrap version 2. Surely apple provides primitives such as border-radius and gradients, which are enough to create an eye-catching button?
The level of skeuomorphic design never really hit the web the same as it was on iOS before version 7. Remember the pool table green felt and wood trim of Game Center? That sort of thing is probably extremely expensive to design and maintain for the wide range of screens offered by Apple products.
Design is not an optimization procedure like chip design. It's dominated by trends, like fashion. There is a small subset of people who care about optimal design, which measures things like perceptual reaction time etc. That's the military
A deeper issue is the cultural shift to an overly judgemental culture which has been built thoughout the decades. The media always, always has thrived on creating moral panics, but the public wasn't always so gullible to them.
There's a noticeable shift towards conservativism and a constant preoccupation with their public image among younger generations. It's even noticeable in statistics , e.g. disapproval of nudism.
Most apps are being installed for access to notifications. Apple is incentivizing this behavior by refusing to implement browser notifs. The sad state of the web in 2020 is only matched by the irony of these companies being more profitable than ever.
Well yes, if you did some analysis of which opinions people have lost their jobs over, and which causes must you support openly if you don't want to be seen as backwards, or which things have people apologised for saying after posting a Tweet, then I'm sure it would be clear that one side dominates societal discourse far more than the other.
It is super obvious that far more people have been fired for championing leftist opinions and causes (living wages, workers' safety, unions) than for being republican/racist/islamophobic.
(Though I am not sure that the right wing dominates societal discourse like you say.)
She was going to work with Deloitte, where she will represent her organization in front of clients that regularly sign off on invoices that resemble less a major purchase and more the GDP of a small country.
Imagine that you have a business.
Would you hire such an angry, callous, and impulsive person to represent you in front of clients?
Unless the name of your business starts with "B" and ends with "ank of America", the answer is probably "no".
Folks on the right are saying that she called for stabbing conservatives.
I don't think that's true.
She was using metaphor -- comparing being stabbed to having a paper cut -- and just did it exceedingly poorly.
The metaphor doesn't become clear unless you watch until the end of the video, and I don't know a lot of people, conservative or liberal, that are all that interested in watching the entirety of a video where they are being offered a complementary stabbing, just so that they can get the punchline.
If you post a video of you start off by repeating, over and over, "I am going to $VERB you", then don't be surprised when people interpret your message as, "I am going to $VERB you".
Finally: imagine that we flip her political orientation, and that she recored an angry video where she used a metaphor in which she talks about shooting BLM supporters.
She would likely be in jail.
There is a political difference in how both threats and actual violence are treated in the United States, and it favors the Left.
Sure they have. There was a story making the rounds just today about a girl losing a Deloitte offer for a pro-BLM post, and FIRE can tell you that even on campus left-wing cancellations aren't unheard of.
