The Lounge is rated Safe For Work. If you're about to post something inappropriate for a shared office environment, then don't post it. No ads, no abuse, and no programming questions. Trolling, (political, climate, religious or whatever) will result in your account being removed.
So my particular flavor of crazy has made me into a shutin over the past couple of years - i am too paranoid to deal with other people on a regular basis outside by spouse. Being schizoaffective requires me to develop some insular hobbies.
It has made employment challenging. Well that, and the fact that I can't control when i daydream and my short term memory is shot meaning i need email or i won't remember we even spoke.
So I've had time to fill, and been hoping I could find something I could do to get me working more and I see ads for a lot of remote gigs.
Trouble is I've tried that before and it's really challenging because being in a separate physical space puts me in "work mode" and I don't have a spare room to make an office out of.
And getting out of the house anyway most days isn't happening as long as my agoraphobia is what it is.
But at least I can still code. I just need to get clever if I want to do enough of it to fill up my days like it used to.
Either that or i need to take on a lot more hobbies. I'm still trying to learn to deal with all this business of being mad. It doesn't come with a manual. It really should. "The hatter's guide to madness" or something. That would be nice.
If you want to work outside a "traditional" office, you obviously need the discipline to do so. Agoraphobia is less of a problem; Isaac Asimov, for example, hated travel, and spent as much time as possible in his regular haunts (living in NYC certainly made that easier for him...).
I would suggest looking for the kind of small organizations that want minor computer programming, and starting with them. While you won't get paid much (if anything), they may serve to get back in harness and rebuild the discipline required for delivery in a commercial environment. If these work out well, you can try going after the commercial gigs.
As for guides about madness, I can't help you. I looked for a "March Hare's Guide to Lunacy", but drew a blank.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
"... like a lamp to those who perceive the meaning of words, and like a hand mirror for a blind man to those without grammar." Bhatti: "Bhattikhavya" 7th. century CE.
The key to correct usage is in the context you intend the reader to imagine. In this case, if you intend to imply that it is in the future ... not present, or past ... that someone cannot "know," then: "would" is appropriate. If your readers assume, or, you have already made clear in the context, you are discussing "future," then greater explicitness may not be necessary.
There is a level of semantic ambiguity in the use of "how," here. Is it a marker for rhetorical usage, or, is it a direct question that asks for a literal description of "method(s)" ? "How" as rhetoric invites a projective response; "how" as gimme-details asks for a constrained response.
Hypothesis: American and English style differences might account for variable usage of could-would-did and how-how-do-how did.
imho, parsing this sentence is beyond the current capability of grammar checkers.
«One day it will have to be officially admitted that what we have christened reality is an even greater illusion than the world of dreams.» Salvador Dali