WFH may be better for the environment but that is a different thing than "the best way of working".

I've been remote for 14 years, I love it, but I've worked with plenty of people who didn't and went back to an office.

Define "best" I suppose - best for corporate efficiency or best for human thriving? But yeah fair can't argue that it relates to efficiency.

The entire concept of capitalist "work" is in opposition to human thriving

> I've been remote for 14 years, I love it, but I've worked with plenty of people who didn't and went back to an office.

I've seen this level of reasonability probably less than 10 times when the remote vs. office debate breaks out. It's a real shame that sites like HN behave identically to twitter and reddit wrt actual conversation and debate about working environments.

> But oh well, so far wildfires are contained to just wildfire season, so not a big deal

We just added a month and a half to wildfire season, just to keep that true!

Yeah, people forget about the energy and pollution costs of forcing everyone to commute. Even if you drive an EV, there’s still pollution from tires.

Given that we’ve proven that remote work is viable even without next gen AR VR devices, a lot of corporate PR supporting the environment feels very empty when we learn their stance on remote work

If you move the goalposts or are vague enough, anything can be true. Working from home is worse for the environment than abolishing capitalism, which is the driving force behind global warming.

See? Conversation is useless if we ignore context or intent.

It’s not like the USSR cared about the environment even the tiniest bit..

Under capitalism at least you get free speech and therefore some public pressure to impose various regulations.

Capitalism has nothing to do with freedom of speech. See: capitalist countries without freedom of speech.

Free market competition is impossible without some degree of free speech, so it depends on how you define ‘capitalism’

…I don’t think that’s what “moving the goalposts” means? What were the goalposts?

I was just observing that WFH is better for the environment than WFO, which I would again say is just an objective fact. Obviously peoples priorities differ, and I guess some people don’t see climate change as real so would fight me on it being a fact, but I feel completely certain about that assertion.

Re: capitalism, I mean, yeah… isn’t that also true? Much much more subjective but capitalism sure seems to be doing a number on the planet. Again what we want to do with that fact is up to priorities but… well tbh I’m confused about what you’re cross about!