I mean I'm kind of shocked we're still getting away with WFH at all; it was just a blip in time and will be gone within 5-10 years entirely. There are very few pure software roles that don't require high-bandwidth, interactive, in-person communications. Simply from a political view, those who are in the office more, by definition, are winning (politics is people).
> There are very few pure software roles that don't require high-bandwidth, interactive, in-person communications.
I would counter that new tools will surface, and they will be remote oriented, making it even easier for people to work from home. At some point, only the "old guard" would want to go back to the office, and will eventually diminish dramatically, like paper did after computers took over.
> Simply from a political view, those who are in the office more, by definition, are winning.
While this may be true, what about upper management who are fully remote?
Strictly my opinion: upper management who are not servant leaders and individual contributors of their own account are, in fact, doomed. No amount of Kafka-esque office theater will save them from cuts.
As for support businesses (food / clothing / commercial real estate / parking / technical services), nearly all of that is also doomed. Urban planners had best figure out how to address the issues of keeping more valuable services (commercial kitchens, entertainment, boutique retail) from fleeing to places closer to home.
