Millions of books are dumpstered every day. MILLIONS. Ever go to a library used book sale? Ever notice that - in MOST cases - 75%+ aren't purchased, even at 50-cents a book?

Sure, some get donated but a lot of book donation places are filtering as they don't need a 100th set of Encyclopedias from 1981.
I know of at least a couple of organizations that fill 20' containers and send to some associated groups in Africa to provide books for kids, but "Morning Glory Milking Farm" as well as Chilton's 1999 Pontiac Minivan manual isn't going to make the cut there either. It costs $ to ship them and they don't have money to waste.
Largely...they get thrown away/pulped. For some reason I'd once noticed that a local library (part of a county-wide metro association) was dumpstering books. Like... a LOT of books - talking a half-full 5 yard dumpster EVERY WEEK. I'd look and there were dozens of heavy duty black garbage bags FULL of books, and not just shitty old ones, there were multiple copies of popular fiction titles, NEW periodicals, all sorts of good stuff. I recognized the dumps were clearly by section as one night several bags would be "history" for example. In the bags they were totally clean too.
I probably dumpster dived 1000 books over the better part of a year, before my wife drew the line bringing home 1-2 shopping bags (eventually i just left a heavy-duty recycling tub in my car for it...) every week. I'm a big reader but that's a lot.
This was a library in an extremely wealthy suburb of 50,000. So I called them and asked about it. IMMEDIATELY the library *insisted* they only threw away damaged books. When I provided pictures, they claimed they were moving to a new facility and someone was just being a little overzealous in their cull.
Their new building was - I shit you not - MAYBE 50 yards away.

Anyway, the point is, I am saddened by the loss of any book, but let's not cry fake tears over this just because it's AI and people are 'shocked' to find out that the public doesn't give much of a shit about books anymore. Because they don't.

Well, what manner of person who thinks ahead decides to live hours away from teh workplace? I know - people who don't plan ahead. If you don't want to go back because you live several states away, that is definitely a you problem. Y'all have so many excuses. Do a risk/reward analysis. Then if you want to live in Alaska, or wherever you want to live, and find employment there.

And let's say we get that universal no one in the workplace Utopia. The cheap housing that is so tempting will just go up in price. Note - I did video conferences, still do. But I didn't move to say Alaska because I like it there, when the company is in New Jersey. Then again, guess I'm not very smart.

Well yeah, but people already accuse me of posting walls of text! ;^)

Yeah, People can have differing thoughts on where they live related to work. A woman I worked with lived about 50 minutes from work. I asked he if that was a nuisance for her. She said that by the time she got home, she was relaxed, and in a much better mood. Granted, she had a pretty scenic drive, but she had a point and she enjoyed driving. Others utterly hate driving. Either outlook is valid.

Now, what is my takeaway from all this? A lot of people really really want to never go to an office again, and have all manner of reasons that going to office is bad. And I have no issues with my 50/50 situation. I get work done without interruption. While the site work is non-stop interruptions. But that some of us do not hate onsite work, is every bit as valid. Others in here find that problematic

Yikes, that sucks!

In what I guess is a reverse corollary, I was offered a job in DC some years ago. The pay was significantly higher.

Problem was, it was DC. A lot higher cost of living. Housing, taxes, the commute is a nightmare. One time I had to leave at noon on Friday. The normal 5 hour trip to home (Pennsylvania) took ten hours. And yeah, the wife was not thrilled (she was already the VP in her company)

Even if she found new work at similar pay, we'd end up with less money after living expenses.

So here I am, living in a beautiful part of the USA - if ridiculous summer humidity, and mighty rainy this year - with more actual money.

Boss gets a dollar, you get a dime, that's why you shit on company time!

I note the response time is based on whether I need something from them, or they need something from me. 8^)

Exactly - And there is the interesting part. The typical angry response does not allow for any deviation from the idea that people who work from home are the most competent, most productive employees who will have the world beating a path to their door. And seem to believe this is universally true.

Certainly some people do work better alone. I've met a number of people who flounder if not supervised. I had a very talented employee once, who if you gave him a task, would say he was going to get a soda before starting, then spend a few hours flirting with some of the staff assistants, he fancied himself a modern Casanova, then come back hours later. He never met a deadline. I finished most of his work. Boss ended up calling me in to issue an order to me "do not finish his work", as they wanted him gone. Probably the supervisors of the staff assistants he was annoying. Irony of all that is I became the Prick in all this, the bastard that had some personality conflict with a top notch employee. Another employee had a side business, took him on as a full partner (the idiot) and this very talented but rudderless guy drove him out of business.

That's an extreme example of a person failing, but there are many lesser degrees of people needing supervision to function.

Another thing is despite what appears to be the norm on Slashdot, most people need a bit of actual humanity around them. Or perhaps most people are cowed into silence by their histrionics if some dares to disagree. But humans are by and large social creatures. Introversion is not the norm. Nothing wrong with introversion, but there seems to be a conscious effort to force on others these days.

Finally, a person who wants to slack off ie, a lazy person - will have a marked tendency to love WFH. Just sayin'!

Yes, some people have the need to make shit up. One of the biggest things I see is the claimed incredible productivity gains that happen only in WFH. At work, if I need something, I go to the person, tell them what I need, in person, and they do it, hand it to me and it's all good. Then some want to only communicate via slack or text. Will they be there to answer? Will I be able to concisely communicate my need and get everything back in a much shorter time? That hasn't been my experience.

My "favorite example of this effect is a guy who claimed he only communicated via text, no phone calls after I offended him with voicemail. So I took a walk to his office, and noted he was standing outside, chatting with someone. I asked for a moment. I simply said "If I call via phone you will answer - if that is too much trouble for you I will pay you a personal visit, I will not be happy, and I will bring the director with me because that's who I am working with. And complex communications via text is a non-starter."

Might be something else going on. In my case, I once thought I was an introvert, but the wife called BS on it. She said "You are obviously in your element, networking, enjoying it, and people want to talk with you even if you are a little terse at times - I think they like that, and you definitely listen." What I thought was my weekly day off where I'd hop in the car to "recharge" was actually processing, which is similar, but marks more in-depth thinking than just avoiding people.

What you describe sounds a little like that.

And that outlook is holding them back.

It feels like the simple requirement of needing a warrant to search rather than "bored officer looking up his ex" would solve 99% of these issues.

Those are tradeoffs. I could move from my small city, and out to some of the poor areas near here. Yes, I'd pay less taxes, and probably have a much cheaper house, I'd also have a 40 minute commute, have to drive almost that far for groceries and shopping, and a long ambulance ride because of the remoteness.

I choose to live 15 minutes from work, and it is not my employers responsibility. I choose to work onsite half the time, home the other half.

And while you might consider your demands to be somehow superior to mine, I dunno, I'm doing just fine. My salary, and investments make whatever it costs me in increased costs for amenities is not a rounding error, but just a cost of life.

This argument y'all demand to have shouldn't be an argument, but you just get so triggered if anyone dares to say anything other than your party line, your intolerance is amusing. Too me, WFH vs onsite and getting spun up is like some people at a bar arguing about the Steelers and Eagles, and getting into a fight about it.

And seriously, do as you will. If going to a workplace is the untenable situation y'all claim, Don't. If your employer wants you to come back to work, don't. You are a grown up with free will, live in the manner you deem appropriate. I've quit jobs in teh deep dark past that I found not to my liking. One job I was put on tasking that was incredibly boring because I was good at it. Others who didn't do very well at it got interesting tasks, while they refused to do that with me. To top it off those guys got promotions, while I didn't because their work was more visible. So I quit. They told me I was up for promotion, but I asked if I had to do the same work, reply was "But you're so good at it Ol!"

Point is, it sucked, so I got a new job that paid 5 grand more a year (no small feat in 1980) As well, I "retired" at 55 from my University job after getting a new Supervisor who was an nuisance, he had no idea what I did and didn't care. Once again, I left. Now I'm working again post retirement.

Point is, I refuse to be a victim. If working is WFH only for you, only WFH. Like I said - it's pretty simple. Stand up for yourself.

You mad bro?

Perhaps I come from a different group, one who has no issue being around other humans, and does not feel the need to get that angry if someone doesn't agree with them.

I'm not angry - I'm not even disappointed.

That's been my point through this whole thing. If working in an office is a deal breaker, find a different place to work.

I don't care if you want to WFH, and never work in an office again. This is your life and your choice to make. I only note that not every job is applicable to WFH only.

That I gave some reasons that enraged some people is odd, at least to me.

What is your upgrade path working at home? Another thing I do that Slashdotters hate is networking. That's pretty difficult to do, and Networking has served me quite well. A concern of mine for WFH people cannot network properly. I've even noticed that the people I interact with during the half of my job that is WFH only view me as a avatar, who does things, not an actual person, I've become friends with many people at the in person work, some who are very beneficial to my career.

I live 15 minutes from work - Are y'all forced to live 40 miles away from the workplace?

So virtually all white collar work - what is your metric, I call virtually all as 99.999 percent, as in no one needs to go to a workplace ever at all. Sorry, that's an extraordinary claim, requiring extraordinary proof.

You present as an introvert, or possibly a schizoid ( A person who does not want to be around others at all, ever) Does not mean a bad thing, schizoids are generally satisfied alone, and many have incredible skillsets, largely due to lack of interruption

Well, I dunno, because you are most definitely saying that I am the problem. I have a lot of responsibility and a lot of command. But let us analyze that. My original statement, just a statement without anything incendiary in it, has ignited a firestorm of profanity, personal insults and general anger. Because people disagree with me, their rage is somehow appropriate.

Seems odd that I am the real problem, not the people who become enraged reading something they do not like and decide to take it personal. Okay though, you all do you. Not my circus, not my monkeys.

I work with many thousands of people on our tasking, and not one of them can do it from home. And the strange thing is not one of use is angry about it. My personal team is named "The Elites" which FWIW, embarrasses me, but it is what it is. We enjoy each other's company, interact very well, and do a very good job. All working with a lot of other people in person, on site. I know of none of your incompetent managers, that always seemed to be a sort of sour grapes statement on the accusers part. Maybe it makes them feel better living in a world where competence is inversely proportional to ones place on the food chain.

Frankly, we all seem happier than the bog standard Slashdot user. In full disclosure, I do have a conceit of playing with y'all, when someone gets enraged, I'll play it out for them, at least until I get bored. Which really is approaching.

So tell us, why would employers want people coming back to work, when they can pay them less, eliminate the workplace, and reap the rewards of not having a them at work. I hear weird stuff about how this is some sort of C-Suite "dick waving" when fine - It dopeasn't cost any where near as much when your business can run well with only 10 people in it. Why would they want to be around you?

Eschew solipsism, where you believe everyone has your job. Might as well avoid the Slashdot echo effect as well, where just because I trigger you, that I must be wrong.

And that its the odd thing - why does what I wrote piss you off so much? I've touched a real nerve. And I don't even care if you want to stay in your basement, wearing underwear or nothing at all. You are completely free to enumerate and refuse to budge on your deal breakers, If you wish to never go into an office with other people in it, that's your prerogative. Indeed, there are many people who function well at work that requires no interaction with others. People who are schizoid wish to not interact with other humans, often have good skillsets based on the ability to function without the distraction of others. Their proclivities make them perfect candidates for WFH.

I merely note that when we try to make our personal preferences apply to all, well, that's solipsism. There are many people - most indeed - that want to be around others, many would be pathologically lonely with the level of interaction demanded by others. Many want the teamwork aspect of human interaction. Yours is not the sole path, homie. That you find it necessary to stoop to claims I'm contradicting myself shows a marked misunderstanding of human nature.

Yeah - watched it, funny as all hell, and enjoyed it. It is truly sad that people feel compelled to hate what they do for a living. I've always gravitated to work I enjoy, but apparently enjoying work is anomalous, I've even been denigrated fort that in here. Judge movies are possibly prophetic and a mirror held up exposing our true nature. Do you surmise that Idiocracy is the state of humanity as well? 8^)