The reason that industry hubs form and exist is because not all work
can be remote, and there are economies of scale and efficiencies in grouping related and essential services and capabilities in one place. This is most pronounced, ironically, in the
least material sectors: cinema, television, music, publishing, banking, and software are all activities in which the end result can literally be wired arond the world in an instant, but each has very strong primary locus hubs: Hollywood, New York, Nashville, and Silicon Valley, in these cases.
Yes, there are regional centres: regulation, language, and culture can create the necessity for localised services, so that film also has national traditions (Bollywood, China, Japan, small local productions in the UK and continental Europe, and a few smaller hubs), banking (London, Frankfurt, Tokyo, Shanghai), etc. But to the extant a single hub can dominate, it often does.
It's the support sectors especially which create anchors. For film, casting departments, carpenters, electricians, caterers, props, lighting, riggers, and a whole host of services and suppliers are best met within central hubs. Software operates similarly -- VC, training, presentations, networking services, and the like, tend to focus on major cities such as San Francisco-San Jose, Seattle, New York, and a number of also-rans. Trying to get highly-qualified services outside those areas is difficult at best.
And even if you do manage to allow software and design folks to work remotely, it's the other staff, often far less-well paid, who still have to show up at the office. And who pay the eye-bleeding rents.
Remote work isn't the solution.
Rents, as a claim to all consumer surplus, can be ameliorated through a land value tax. That's the solution which is badly needed.