Hacker News Reader

Comment by city41 | Hacker News Reader

I work at home at my current job about 95% of the time. I don't mind it, and it does have some serious advantages. But I still feel having your team in one building is the better way to go. It can also get a little lonely, and spending so much time in your own home does get old.

The trend of the "virtual company" where everyone works remotely will only increase, and I think it might even become the norm. So I'm getting used to it and looking to ways to make it truly ideal for me. Recently I've been contacted by companies about potentially working with them and when I tell them I really can't move, every one of them has said working remotely would be fine. Even just a year ago that wouldn't have been the case.

View on HN

I do hope this becomes the trend. I'd love to work mostly from home, or at least from where ever I want. I don't like offices much.

If it did become the norm, imagine how much less downtown office space we would need.

Indeed, and how much fuel and pollution it would save from people not having to commute every day.

Also think how much person-to-person social interaction would be wiped out. Not very pleasant from my point of view

This is not zero-sum. Spend those 1-2hrs a day not commuting with your family, friends, playing sports, etc.

It also isn't mutually exclusive. Just because you don't work from home doesn't mean you have a 1/2 hour commute each way. It also doesn't mean that you spend your commute by yourself. Carpooling, taking the bus, or metro all offer chances to socialize with people outside of your current friends and family group. A large part of interacting with people at work is that they are outside of your current social circle. You can branch out and get to know people that you wouldn't normally associate yourself with.

Also, working from home doesn't guarantee that you will be working the same hours . I know a few people that are expected to work extra hours because they have more free time from not commuting.

> I know a few people that are expected to work extra hours because they have more free time from not commuting.

That's a silly thing to stand for

I live in a part of the country that has pretty mediocre tech options, which means that anyone doing any interesting dev work telecommutes. The result of this? There's a growing community telecommuters that all hang out with each other, meet monthly, do hacknights, drop by co-working spaces etc. It's actually pretty awesome because rather than just your coworkers you have this "other office" of people you get to learn from. As telecommuting/remote working grows I think we'll see much better social interaction start to form, communities that are more based on what your passionate about rather than that you happen to share an office space. Additionally with remote work comes a lot more flexibility, which means a lot more social flexibility, it's easier than ever to grab lunch with a friend an in entirely different industry. I think basing social interaction around a 9-6 schedule and being locked in a building is much more damaging than the alternative.

Thats really cool how all you you have found each other and are able to get together regularly. I'm in Columbia, SC (not exactly the hot-bed of tech) and we have a similar situation.

But from a long-term sustainability stand-point, we want to grow local tech companies that contribute to our own economy and give us control over our city's well-being. It would be interesting if a bunch of you who telecommute could band together to start a company. Seems like you already get along well outside of work

Very good point. If you want the interaction, you could get together with your friends (assuming they telecommute too) and code where ever you want, instead of just with the people that were for some reason assigned to the same box X in building Y.

The flexibility will make social life more interesting instead of less.

Another good thing would be that you can move to any nice place you want, instead of being bound geographically to the (usually expensive and small) homes in the area around your workplace.

If you need a friend, get a hobby with people.

They call it your social life for a reason.

I for one love not being constantly yipped at while deep in though about what I'm being paid to do, then going and doing what I want, when I want, with people I actually like.

Well, I'm torn on this. My initial, non-thinking reaction was one of rabid agreement. This is very correct if you're a 9to5er. If you are at the office to put in your 40 hours and then leave, I would agree that there is no room to inject a social life into this. There's also the issue of breaking flow, which you alluded to.

I think the typical startup lifestyle changes this a bit, though. We who run startups( generally )don't work 40 hour weeks, and if you're even a bit extroverted, chances are you're going to need to "get energy" from social interaction with your coworkers, since time to do this outside the office is fairly limited.

With the standard introvert archetype, this is likely a non-issue. My money is on samtp being an extrovert, and you( and I )not capable of empathizing with the odd need they have for such interaction.

I am an extrovert.

I just don't find the pleasure of talking with someone compatible with parts of my job. The other parts it works wonderfully with.

You think long hours are unique to the startup world? You can have a social life and work long hours. You just have to intentionally do it. IMO its a sign of maturity and adulthood.

I don't subscribe to dividing your life into clean boxes of 'work life' 'social life' 'family life'...

I think you need all the different elements in your life, but it is often most effective to combine different needs together (such as socializing with work friends or helping social friends with a work project). It offers opportunities to make more meaningful friendships and a better work environment.

Oh I socialize plenty with people I do work with....with my clients on the other end of the country, with co-workers in Canada and parts of the US, etc.

Then I turn off the skype chat and knock out a iPhone app when it's time to stop chit chatting.

I also help setup NSLunches in Atlanta with other iOS people and setup lunches around town with various other folks.

I find it depends a lot on the person.

I don't think online communication and in-person communication are identical, but depending on the person, they aren't necessarily better/worse. The people I know the best personally are people with whom I talk at least semi-regularly via all three of: IRL, real-time text chat, and email; and who are themselves also at least somewhat "fluent" in all three media. Some of my closest friends are people I see occasionally irl but often online, so I'm not sure it even correlates that well (at least for me). You get different sides of a person via each of them I find. Some people are of course much stronger at one or another one. There are some people where if I were required to only interact with them face-to-face it'd be weird; and other people where if I were required to interact with them only online it'd be weird.

I think it would also change the job market. With the artificial boundary of geography lifted, suddenly companies will look for employees very differently. What would the effect of that be? Rock star employees can demand higher salaries? Average joes forced to accept lower salaries? Will every company incorporate in Delaware? :) I'm not an economist, but I do think things along those lines would happen more.

Following the recent earthquakes in Christchurch, New Zealand this is a subject of interest.

With the central business district closed for 5 weeks and counting, many people who were formerly office-bound are now working from their home or offices being set up in suburban housing.

It will be interesting to see how much of this change will be permanent.

In my experience the social aspect is the hardest part of remote/home working to get right.

I do think the loss of a more intimate social cohesion does increase the risk of off-shoring/in-shoring positions to cheaper locations. As someone who moved from the Midwest to be closer to where the action is, I suppose that would have been good for me before, but both nationally and globally it won't be a transition without a lot of growing pains.

Indeed, this has become a secret recruitment tool: http://www.flickr.com/photos/technomancy/tags/remoteoffice

Working remote is good but it also depends on the type of position and type of remote. There are definitely unique challenges depending on the type of positions. For example, IMO:

Solo Backend Developer = Remote Anywhere=OK

Backend Developer with a team = Remote within the city= Possible; Remote outside of city=Challenging; Remote International=Hell No;

Front End Developer = Alway prefer in-house; Remote (depending on how good they are) within or outside city=Possible; Remote International = Hell No

Front End Developer with a team = Almost alway prefer in-house; Remote (depending on how good they are) within or outside city=Challenging; Remote International=Hell No;

Out of interest (and as a freelance developer), could you explain what the differences between positions are?

I wear all of those hats from time to time, and I'm a Remote International, and it works ok.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com