经济与社会科学2020bfi.uchicago.edu
有多少工作可以在家完成？
How many jobs can be done at home?
进阶 · 约 25 分钟读完前置知识：劳动经济学基础、O*NET 职业数据、分类统计口径
导读
这是芝加哥大学 Becker Friedman 研究所 2020 年 3 月发布的白皮书，Dingel 与 Neiman 利用职业层面的任务数据（O\*NET 中关于工作条件的问题）估计：约 34% 的美国岗位有可能完全在家完成。论文的结论只是“可在家做”的上限式分类，并非预测实际会有多少人转为远程办公。
HN 关注点：疫情初期所有人都在问“到底有多少工作能搬到家里”，这篇论文给出了一个可引用的量化上限，HN 读者则围绕住房条件、时区、薪酬与生产力等现实约束展开争论。
后来怎么样
这篇论文在疫情初期成为讨论远程办公可行性的标准参考，其“34% 的岗位可在家完成”这一数字被媒体和政策机构广泛引用；按职业分类评估远程办公可行性的方法也被多国统计机构（如英国 ONS）和大量后续研究沿用，并扩展到其他国家与行业的测算。
HN 评论精选
这几条评论里：支持 1 补充 2 亲历 1
亲历非科技行业缺乏合适的家庭工作空间，且许多职业依赖面对面社交，远程化没那么容易。
作为既长期远程办公、也在办公室工作过的人，我觉得讨论非科技行业的 WFH 时漏掉了一个重要因素：工作空间。软件工程师有点被惯坏了，因为我们收入高，能改造家里的区域创造好的工作条件，实在不行还能抱着笔记本去咖啡馆。我最近搬到更好但更小的房子，放弃了原来的家庭办公室，现在疫情期间只能在餐厅和沙发上工作，体验差太多——听起来很傻，但整天待在家对家具的损耗明显更大。我的看法是：住宅从来就不是为 WFH 设计的，办公室里有很多我们习以为常的细节。全家都困在屋里后，我得频繁打扫、洗更多的碗。还有社交层面：科技业有一种“只要能干活，行为、穿着、交流方式无所谓”的文化，但销售、法律等很多职业高度依赖密切的社交互动，科技业在这方面很特殊。
0xFACEFEED查看英文原文
As someone who's worked from a lot and also worked from an office, I feel like there's an important component missing when discussing WFH for professions outside of tech. One important issue IMO is just having a workspace. Software engineers are kinda spoiled in this regard because we make the big bucks. We can afford to retrofit areas of our homes to create good working conditions. We can take our laptops to coffee shops in a pinch. I recently upgraded my living situation by moving into a much nicer place, but it's smaller so I ditched the "home office" setup I had before. Now with COVID I'm working in my dining room and on my couch. It's so much worse. It might sound silly but I'm putting a lot more wear/tear on my furniture by being around all day. My take on this is that homes aren't and never were designed for WFH conditions. There are so many details about offices that we take for granted. I found myself having to clean way more often and do way more dishes now that the entire family is stuck in the house together. Then there's a socialization aspect. Tech has a culture of "as long as you can do the job, it doesn't matter how you behave/dress/interact" -- this thinking is applied along a spectrum, some companies are more extreme than others about it. But a lot of professions like sales/legal/etc rely very heavily on close social interaction. Tech is also unique in this regard IMO.
支持即便实际比例低于 34%，远程办公的社会收益依然可观。
论文称“我们的分类意味着 34% 的美国岗位有可能在家完成”。哪怕只有 25% 的岗位能远程，影响也会是巨大的：汽车交通减少、想远程的员工幸福感提升、父母有更多时间陪孩子，对整个社会都有好处。
ravenstine查看英文原文
> Our classification implies that 34 percent of U.S. jobs can plausibly be performed at home. If even 25% of jobs could be made remote, that would be huge. The reduction in automobile traffic, the improved happiness of workers(who want to work remote), as well as parents being around more for their kids, would benefit society overall.
补充跨时区协作的成本被低估，时差是远程工作能否顺畅的关键变量。
远程工作并不都一样。我认为让远程过渡更顺畅的一个因素是：分布式团队处在同一时区，或时差不超过一小时。我现在的公司 SF 与 Portland 之间开电话会议，工作生活几乎不受影响，我们甚至一起线上吃午饭。而我上一份工作要开 SF 对亚洲、对达拉斯、对欧洲的会，很快就精疲力尽——一个非例行的会议光协调时间就要两天。
somethoughts查看英文原文
All remote work is not created equal. I think an aspect of remote work being a more seamless/smoother transition is for the distributed team to be in the same time zone or have less than 1 hour time difference. At my current company, we have conference calls between SF-Portland without much change in work/life. We evan have virtual lunches together. I recall having to do SF-Asia and even SF-Dallas and SF-Europe calls in my previous job and I was burnt out real quick. Just trying to plan a meeting that wasn't already a recurring scheduled meeting took about 2 days. [EDIT] Based on the initial responses I changed it from the same time zone being a key aspect to an aspect which makes the transition seamless/smoother.
补充远程办公的落地要回答生产力、薪酬、可持续性与滥用四个问题，混合制更现实。
很多人提过，但一个岗位能否在家完成确实要考虑几点：1）生产力是升是降；2）公司是否还愿意给你同样的薪水；3）对大批人是否可持续，还是只适合自我选择喜欢这种方式的少数人；4）会不会有人滥用，最终把制度搞坏。我觉得更可能的落地形式是混合制，比如“周三在家办公”——而不是周五或周一，因为那基本等于默许人们周五干一小时就提前过周末。
xt00查看英文原文
Many people have brought this up, but there are definitely things to consider for a job to be done while working from home: 1) worker productivity (does it go up or down for all of these professions) 2) do companies want to pay you as much if you work from home? 3) is it sustainable for large swathes of people vs. small groups of people who self-select to like this work-style 4) will people abuse the system such that it ruins it for everybody else I can see a far more likely implementation of this would be a mixed case -- "work from home wednesdays" or something like that.. not friday or monday because then basically people would assume there is a certain amount of abuse of people working for 1 hour on Friday then starting their weekend early..
历次讨论
- 2020Hacker News 讨论帖205 分 · 135 评
同领域还值得读
一切的回报率，1870–2015
The Rate of Return on Everything, 1870–2015
利用1870–2015年多国的长期数据，估算股票、住房等各类资本的回报率，并将其与经济增长率进行比较。
经济与社会科学2019 · 487 分 · 260 评进阶 · 约 100 分钟编辑精选一切资产的回报率，1870–2015
The Rate of Return on Everything, 1870–2015
构建了 1870–2015 年 16 个国家的长周期资产回报数据集，覆盖股票、住房、政府债券和短期票据，系统比较各类资产的真实回报与波动性。
经济与社会科学2018 · 215 分 · 151 评进阶 · 约 120 分钟编辑精选一切资产的回报率，1870–2015（2019）
The Rate of Return on Everything, 1870–2015 (2019)
这篇发表于《经济学季刊》的论文构建了 1870–2015 年间 16 个主要发达国家的股票、债券、房地产等资产收益率的长周期数据库。
经济与社会科学2024 · 190 分 · 148 评进阶 · 约 80 分钟编辑精选想法是否越来越难找？
Are ideas getting harder to find?
探讨“想法是否越来越难找到”：通过衡量多个领域的“研究生产率”，发现维持相同的增长需要投入指数级增长的研究资源，即研究效率在持续下降。
经济与社会科学2016 · 182 分 · 106 评入门 · 约 60 分钟编辑精选比特币与区块链的经济极限
The Economic Limits of Bitcoin and the Blockchain
芝加哥大学 Eric Budish 的论文从经济学角度分析比特币与区块链的根本限制：核心论点是只要攻击网络（双花或砸盘做空）的收益超过挖矿成本，51% 算力攻击就有利可图，而挖矿…
经济与社会科学2018 · 176 分 · 37 评进阶 · 约 90 分钟编辑精选