131–140 of 367 posts
I don't think the next hub of cultural and economic significance is necessarily going to be about what we think of as startups, it will probably be something that doesn't even register with most people today.
Im convinced that the next valley will happen in the place that can attract the most unmarried people ages 18 through 30. What do these people care about? - night life - high density urban living - progressive local governments and freedom (drug and marriage decriminalization). - good public transportation - access to high speed internet - good universities As they grow older and get married, affordable and high spee…
What if you didn't have to attract the "most" 18 to 30 year olds? What if what you really needed was to attract an underserved niche of 18 to 30 year olds? I think Atlanta or Nashville is ripe. Northeasterners can and do move to California already. Southerners are much less likely to do so imo. The rural market is grossly underserved right now. Almost none of the efforts to get people into computer science are hittin…
It's a miserable experience. You go from seeing a lot of people who look like you in the industry of your choice, to being one of a token few. Food and grocery options go from omnipresent to something you have to hunt down. The way you lead your life goes from something you take for granted to a difference that you must confront at every turn.
Good luck building the next Silicon Valley in a place that is not welcoming to multiculturalism.
Dallas: - Highest growth rate in the nation (especially for 18 - 30 years old), after Houston, which is down now due to the oil industry, placing Dallas at #1 - Highest spending on food and alcohol at restaurants - http://bizbeatblog.dallasnews.com/2015/09/dallas-fort-worth-... - One of the most affordable places to live in the U.S. - Large number of top tier universities within 3 hours (Univ of Texas, Baylor, TCU, S…
Yes, but Dallas fails abysmally on the urban livability and density test. It's one giant exurb. Much of it should be reclassified as a rural area. (Speaking as an Atlantan -- we have the exact same problem.)
Dallas is a little different in that its suburbs are fairly dense, but you have to go there, and...car again. And, for me, life is way, way nicer without a car.
Dallas: - Highest growth rate in the nation (especially for 18 - 30 years old), after Houston, which is down now due to the oil industry, placing Dallas at #1 - Highest spending on food and alcohol at restaurants - http://bizbeatblog.dallasnews.com/2015/09/dallas-fort-worth-... - One of the most affordable places to live in the U.S. - Large number of top tier universities within 3 hours (Univ of Texas, Baylor, TCU, S…
Dallas misses on a few of pg's key points: it's a sprawling driving city, lack of a top university, and a red state culture. > Pittsburgh is fortunate in being a pre-car city. It's not too spread out. Because those 25 to 29 year olds do not like driving. They prefer walking, or bicycling, or taking public transport... Cities where you can get around without driving are just better period. > Pittsburgh has something P…
Also, what is your definition of a "top university"? Ivy?
Also fun fact...Dallas has the largest public transit system in the nation as far as length of track.
Uber is building a self-driving car research center in Pittsburgh. They hired most of the CMU self-driving car people. Supposedly they're going to renovate a railroad roundhouse in Hazelwood and use some of the empty space from the old coke plant for road testing. How's that working out? In California, anything you do on your own time belongs to you, and the previous employer can't enforce most non-compete agreements…
> In California, anything you do on your own time belongs to you, and the previous employer can't enforce most non-compete agreements. I work in Pittsburgh, and recently learned that my employer can own intellectual property that I created on my own time in my home. I was appalled.
It's not something to be appalled about. They aren't trying to be evil overlords.
I'm a CMU undergraduate who moved to San Francisco. Every year, the School of Computer Science publishes a survey of where undergrads go after college: https://www.cmu.edu/career/salaries-and-destinations/2015-su... [pdf] About half of the 2015 graduates go to employment in the West/CA. I'll add that I am not even a graduate in CS (I majored in Business), yet I know a lot of non-CS majors my year who have also moved…
Im convinced that the next valley will happen in the place that can attract the most unmarried people ages 18 through 30. What do these people care about? - night life - high density urban living - progressive local governments and freedom (drug and marriage decriminalization). - good public transportation - access to high speed internet - good universities As they grow older and get married, affordable and high spee…
This ignores the fact that the current Silicon Valley has none of these things. Palo Alto has a 3x4 blocks region of low density apartment buildings alongside storefronts, and that's all encircled by single-family residences. Right now, only NY and Chicago (edit: and Boston) have anything in the US that really can claim to be high density. Most of the other "next valley" candidates are not set up to be high density,…
Hmmm. Does he even reference the fact that the SF Bay Area was the recipient of massive amounts of government and government contractor money? And what about the free-wheeling, non-traditional culture (embodied in the Homebrew Computing Club)? These two factors created Silicon Valley. Federal money subsidized the semiconductor boom, which brought a lot of technical expertise to the area. Then the open-minded culture…
Not to mention a couple of top-ten universities located within 50 miles, and other great schools elsewhere in California.
Strange comment about Pittsburgh's diversity and strangeness! In my experience, outside Oakland, Shadyside, Squirrel Hill, perhaps Monroeville, and some working class neighborhoods, Pittsburgh is a fairly conservative South-US-ish city.
It's costs.
Commercial rents have skyrocketed. Moreover, residential rents have skyrocketed to the point where few people in the service industry can afford to live in SF at market rates. Even if you can find a space, how are you going to staff it? Who's willing to commute in from Oakland (which is getting expensive too) for a low wage job with grueling hours?
Nopa, one of the most successful SF restaurants in the past 10 years, is posting job ads for cooks on their menus now.
This isn't because of a slow permit process. Nopa hasn't applied for a permit in years. It's a result of the macroeconomic effects of a tech boom. So while I'm very happy to see PG highlight macroeconomic factors that foster economic growth in cities, I see a missed opportunity to fully address their complex effects.
This is probably because this issue has been politicized here in SF, with the tech industry often lambasted for "destroying" the city (this comes from a lot of the people getting pushed out), so tech folks often get hyperdefensive and contort themselves trying to point fingers elsewhere. I think that's what's happened here with PG trying to blame the government's permitting process.
But clearly if we want to continue making SF an attractive startup hub, we need to help "little restaurants and cafes" continue to open and operate. And the elephant in the room there is quite simply the high rents and high cost of living for workers in the service industry, driven by a huge influx of wealthier residents competing for space. You want a startup hub, you need city policies that manage that growth.