Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

'We all suffer': why San Francisco techies hate the city they transformed

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 131 posts

Re: 'We all suffer': why San Francisco techies hate the city they transformed

#21

Post by atoav »

brokenkebab wrote: post #13

It's hilarious to read all these militaristic wordings about techies waging "battles", and "conquering" the city, as if it's about barbarian hordes which came down on peaceful SF, pillaged, raped, and burnt everything to the ground. Sure, why scritinize California's, or the city's political theater, why questioning law enforcement inefficiency. Can it be somehow related to drugs, prostitution, and theft? No, it's all…

Technology has a transformative effect on society and the way we live. This is why old cities look like they look (built before cars and trains were a thing) and this is why most US cites look like they look (built during the prime of the car age).

Similar things are certainly true for other technology, even for the (tolerated) side products of said technology. Is any single person at fault here? Probably not. They mostly acted rationally within their small horizon, but together they created a problem, even for themselves.

We have similar problems when it comes to markets and global warming. Many individually rational decisions can lead to negative outcomes for the whole.

There is a very good episode on the Omega Tau Podcast on precisely that problem: https://pca.st/t8Yd

The interviewed Scientist Dr. Igor Nikolic focused on the design of a co-evolutionary method for constructing Agent Based Models of the evolution of Large Scale Socio-Technical systems in the TU Delft in the Netherlands and tries to tackle problems like these, where you'd be lost without a more systemic view of the problem.

Re: 'We all suffer': why San Francisco techies hate the city they transformed

#22

Post by jwilliams »

mehrdadn wrote: post #17
mschuster91 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> why not just send your kids to the schools your taxes are paying for? Because thanks to massive underfunding US public education is ... not exactly what one can expect from a first world country. In some areas children actually only have four days of school because of underfunding ( http://www.ladbible.com/news/news-school-switches-to-four-da... ).

Is this actually the case in SF though?

Yes, I've heard of days getting cut - and many extra-circular programs too. Even in extreme-affluent parts of Silicon Valley.

Often due to the ubiquity of private schools, property taxes aren't funneled effectively to public schools. So funding can be very patchy.

Moving specifically back to SF, the system is also a lottery[1].

1: https://www.kqed.org/news/11641238/how-the-san-francisco-sch...

Re: 'We all suffer': why San Francisco techies hate the city they transformed

#23

Post by huffmsa »

huffmsa wrote: post #16
huffmsa wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Versus the outlying suburbia? Because it's harder to get around in suburbia. Cities are easier to walk / ride your bike around and you're just a face in the crowd. People notice you if you're camped out in a suburban shopping mall.

Or versus another city, it's the weather. Never hot enough to turn you into jerky, never cold enough to turn you into a popsicle. Since piles of people dead from exposure isn't a risk, the city doesn't have the same motivation to build shelters like a New York does, so they kick it to the side. The citizenry gets concerned with poop on the street, but once it's bodies, they really expect the government to do somethin…

So, now that the government can safely do nothing, why won't the private sector fill in?

3 part answer:

1) my understanding of the political lean of the city is that the government is the great social savior.

2) most private groups who take care of the homeless and otherwise destitute havehistorically had a religious affiliation.

3) private groups have to deal with the same real estate prices as everyone else, and because of 1 and 2 and the general skepticism of religion by the citizenry, they won't be given any tax breaks or land price cuts, meaning they simply cannot afford to setup service.

It really is a self feeding system of misery-but-not-enough-to-kill-you all the way around.

Re: 'We all suffer': why San Francisco techies hate the city they transformed

#24

Post by majewsky »

mschuster91 wrote: post #12
cribbles wrote: post #9

>A million-plus for a home with $300,000 down? Then when we have kids, $30,000 a year for private school? This quote totally confounded me. Why is it a given that their kids have to go to private school? If you're optimizing your budget for home-ownership, why not just send your kids to the schools your taxes are paying for?

> why not just send your kids to the schools your taxes are paying for? Because thanks to massive underfunding US public education is ... not exactly what one can expect from a first world country. In some areas children actually only have four days of school because of underfunding ( http://www.ladbible.com/news/news-school-switches-to-four-da... ).

> US public education is ... not exactly what one can expect from a first world country.

As a European, I slowly wonder if there's any public service in the US that meets the "first-world country" standard. Not education. Certainly not healthcare. Infrastructure is also crumbling from what I hear.

Re: 'We all suffer': why San Francisco techies hate the city they transformed

#26

Post by gingabriska »

majewsky wrote: post #24
mschuster91 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> why not just send your kids to the schools your taxes are paying for? Because thanks to massive underfunding US public education is ... not exactly what one can expect from a first world country. In some areas children actually only have four days of school because of underfunding ( http://www.ladbible.com/news/news-school-switches-to-four-da... ).

> US public education is ... not exactly what one can expect from a first world country. As a European, I slowly wonder if there's any public service in the US that meets the "first-world country" standard. Not education. Certainly not healthcare. Infrastructure is also crumbling from what I hear.

US is the best if you are rich, you can get almost everything here not same in Europe.

Re: 'We all suffer': why San Francisco techies hate the city they transformed

#27

Post by mcv »

ainiriand wrote: post #10
cribbles wrote: post #9

>A million-plus for a home with $300,000 down? Then when we have kids, $30,000 a year for private school? This quote totally confounded me. Why is it a given that their kids have to go to private school? If you're optimizing your budget for home-ownership, why not just send your kids to the schools your taxes are paying for?

Because the public system sucks and the more money you have for that the more opportunities they will have.

That the school system sucks is not an unavoidable fact of life, it's a problem that needs to be fixed. I admit, another problem on the big pile of problems that need to be fixed, apparently.

Re: 'We all suffer': why San Francisco techies hate the city they transformed

#28

Post by thaumasiotes »

huffmsa wrote: post #16
huffmsa wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Versus the outlying suburbia? Because it's harder to get around in suburbia. Cities are easier to walk / ride your bike around and you're just a face in the crowd. People notice you if you're camped out in a suburban shopping mall.

Or versus another city, it's the weather. Never hot enough to turn you into jerky, never cold enough to turn you into a popsicle. Since piles of people dead from exposure isn't a risk, the city doesn't have the same motivation to build shelters like a New York does, so they kick it to the side. The citizenry gets concerned with poop on the street, but once it's bodies, they really expect the government to do somethin…

> The citizenry gets concerned with poop on the street

This does not appear to be true for San Francisco.

Re: 'We all suffer': why San Francisco techies hate the city they transformed

#29

Post by mcv »

gingabriska wrote: post #26
majewsky wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> US public education is ... not exactly what one can expect from a first world country. As a European, I slowly wonder if there's any public service in the US that meets the "first-world country" standard. Not education. Certainly not healthcare. Infrastructure is also crumbling from what I hear.

US is the best if you are rich, you can get almost everything here not same in Europe.

According to the article, even the rich are complaining.

Re: 'We all suffer': why San Francisco techies hate the city they transformed

#30

Post by pjc50 »

huffmsa wrote: post #23
huffmsa wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or versus another city, it's the weather. Never hot enough to turn you into jerky, never cold enough to turn you into a popsicle. Since piles of people dead from exposure isn't a risk, the city doesn't have the same motivation to build shelters like a New York does, so they kick it to the side. The citizenry gets concerned with poop on the street, but once it's bodies, they really expect the government to do somethin…

So, now that the government can safely do nothing, why won't the private sector fill in? 3 part answer: 1) my understanding of the political lean of the city is that the government is the great social savior. 2) most private groups who take care of the homeless and otherwise destitute havehistorically had a religious affiliation. 3) private groups have to deal with the same real estate prices as everyone else, and be…

There is literally no money in it, so obviously the private sector isn't going to do anything. You might get a bit of "third sector" charity, but it's always inadequate wherever you go.
Post reply on HN