But that isn't the argument/landscape. For one, I'm not arguing that offices are superior. I just can't in good faith blanket claim that remote is better. My gut is each is a tradeoff.
My main qualm in this is I have seen countless times folks have "obvious and well reasoned arguments" on why the companies that are succeeding are doing things wrong. I am not so naive as to fully expect a superior work environment would naturally rise to success, but I do question why successful remote jobs are typically not the norm, if that is such a better way.
I think we can agree that there is a tradeoff. Also i dont expect or demand that everyone works from home.
Having said that, most arguments against remote work on hn are usually wrong solutions to legitimate problems.
These answers are usually centred around people’s need to socialise, housing issues, communication issues and supervision. All of these have alternative solutions that the onsite crowd doesn't want to explore.
But even so, everyone is entitled to an opinion. We should also be entitled to a preference. But the onsite crowd usually wants everyone else to be onsite (otherwise whom are they going to socialise with or who are they going to sit with in front of a whiteboard?). Basically they want to remote crowd to fill in their voids and gaps.
I have no issue with people wanting to be on site. I want their wish be granted. But they should have no right in dictating where and how i should do my work.
Also a company is successful due to various factors none of which seem to be working onsite or remote for that matter. Just because we do things a certain way it doesnt mean thats the right way or the only way. Nor does it mean something is not the norm due to not being equally good or better. Plenty of things we do as a society can be improved, and one of them is that due to modern technologies we can give people the option to chose where to work from. Now it can become the norm due to a convergence of multiple factors.
You have the claim that remote work is more productive and happier. You more than heavily imply that this is a universal truth for everyone. What is your actual evidence to that claim? I can easily accept "I like remote work more." I have a hard time thinking that generalizes in any meaningful way.
Note that I don't know that there is a solid claim that "getting people together" is amazing. It does at least have some appeal to the social of the working side. If folks are building things together, it is not hard to see there may be advantage to them being there together to do so.
Easier to see with some jobs. For easy example, why insist that all members of a sports team relocate to the home town for that team? At face value, you could "trust" them to just all show up on gameday ready for the game. I don't think anyone would argue for that, though.
My main qualm in this is I have seen countless times folks have "obvious and well reasoned arguments" on why the companies that are succeeding are doing things wrong. I am not so naive as to fully expect a superior work environment would naturally rise to success, but I do question why successful remote jobs are typically not the norm, if that is such a better way.