Hacker News Reader

In my experience, people who chose larger living space over shorter commutes are very resentful about resuming their commute.

Meanwhile, those who live in shoeboxes need the external space to stay sane.

Don't underestimate the selfish reasons on either side.

View on HN

I didn't realise "not wanting to travel for over an hour each day, unpaid" and "not wanting to go back to the confinement of a tiny home" were forms of selfishness. If only there were some sort of middle ground, eh?

Between urban and sub-urban?

My point is choosing either on-site or WFH means someone has gotten a bad deal. Personally I think the environmental argument trumps most others.

Why are you treating this as either/or? Why are you pitting worker against worker? The article clearly mentions hybrid work. Relatively few, if any firms have enforced mandatory remote work on people who don't want it. This is about employers ignoring the benefits of remote work while trying to grab that little bit of autonomy granted to their employees.

Hybrid is the worst of both worlds. Coming into an office just to be on zoom calls.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com