361–370 of 533 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Sure, the Mother of all Demos showed off remote collaborative work in 1968. ...and was certainly an exciting futuristic demo, but unfortunately neither practical nor feasible with the actual widely available technologies of its time.
But we’ve still been hearing about how remote work and the paperless office is the future for 50 years.
> San Francisco Bay Area cities are cracking down on free food at tech companies ... ... while they hand out hundreds of thousands of free needles that end up on the street, among shit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they tried to take the cafes away from existing tech employees, they would have a riot on their hands. Googlers and Facebookers would burn the city to the ground. It is an intensely beloved part of the job.
> Googlers and Facebookers would burn the city to the ground. At most, they would make a website with a little game featuring an animation of the city burning down, then giggle and and share it with each other, all the while deaf to the irony that, in reality, they already are burning it down; they just can’t see it. The disconcern behind your whining threat exerts, on the broader population, a blunt misery of slow-b…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be fair, it's not quite 'economy 101'. Or rather, 'economy 101' is that anyone with enough leverage, will use monopoly powers in one area, to take control of an adjacent economy. American Oil empires were not built on some new amazing way to get at oil, it was because some had control of the railroads, and charged their competitors a little more to transport therefore putting them out of business (through aggressi…
>We live in communities, not economies. The City already tries to foster community by forcing people to share space against their will, via public transit. It's a dystopian hellscape, not a community. You can't just build those by force.
This is one of the most stupid policy I have ever seen in the bay area (and there are a lot of stupid ones over here). As much as I dislike some of the big tech cos and the TechBros working there bragging about the free food all the time, I still believe a company should be able to decide if they want to offer food or not. Restaurants were unable to turn a profit, so they lobbied successfully and now everyone beside…
A pretty big nitpick, but the world is infinitely more complex than anything in an 'Econ 101' class would be able to actually explain. 101 level classes often simplify things to the point of uselessness.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is absolutely what will happen. In an attempt to force tech workers to "interact" with the community, what will happen is that the restaurants will become playgrounds for tech workers and the community members will go elsewhere.
Seems a little early to say this with certainty, no? The thing hasn't even finished being built AFAIU
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's almost like we need a system of government where officials are held accountable for decisions they make in office years later when they prove to be incredibly poor decisions. The current system allows them to make long term decisions and get away with it since it does not impact them (term limits, etc help with that)
Which politicians from which decades will we hold responsible for allowing explosive tech growth without a plan for the long time residents, service workers and teachers who can no longer afford to live in the area, unless they live on the sidewalk or the bus? Surely this was foreseeable.