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

91–100 of 131 posts

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

#91

Post by codyb »

kieckerjan wrote: post #43

European here. My girlfriend and I are excited to do a tour of the West Coast later this year. As a tech I feel it would be silly to skip San Francisco and Silicon Valley, but I must say the stories I have been hearing have dampened my initial enthusiasm considerably. I now wonder if it is worth our while. If "avocado toast and class warfare" are the main attractions nowadays, we can probably spend our time more wise…

San Francisco’s very pretty but the best part of the West Coast is the United States National Park System.

Yosemite, Sequoia, John Muir Woods, Death Valley! All around there is Arches, Glacier, canyons, deserts, forests, and more.

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

#92

Post by codyb »

pogden wrote: post #72
kieckerjan wrote: post #43

European here. My girlfriend and I are excited to do a tour of the West Coast later this year. As a tech I feel it would be silly to skip San Francisco and Silicon Valley, but I must say the stories I have been hearing have dampened my initial enthusiasm considerably. I now wonder if it is worth our while. If "avocado toast and class warfare" are the main attractions nowadays, we can probably spend our time more wise…

The Bay Area is absolutely worth visiting. The Computer History Museum alone is a must see if you're into that sort of thing. The wealth inequality and housing crises don't make it a bad place to visit any more than New York, London, or any of the great cities. People wouldn't complain about the changes in their home regions if they didn't love those places. There are many things about SF and the South Bay that make…

As someone who lives in NYC but visits San Francisco for work, the homeless there are a lot more visible. I see homeless people in NYC for sure, but the numbers in San Francisco are staggering.

I can’t name a neighborhood like the tenderloin.

That being said, I don’t feel particularly threatened generally (although I am a tall man), but it is depressing.

In NYC I don’t mind tossing out a buck here or there, but in San Francisco it just feels too innumerable to even start.

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

#93

Post by meerita »

sundvor wrote: post #53
mcv wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It doesn't suck in countries such as Australia and Norway.

They have both systems. And public system always sucks, because there isn't an unlimited amount of good teachers for all the public offer and, not the same amount of resources. Private schools have better everything because there's competition.

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

#94

Post by throwaway9d0291 »

kieckerjan wrote: post #43

European here. My girlfriend and I are excited to do a tour of the West Coast later this year. As a tech I feel it would be silly to skip San Francisco and Silicon Valley, but I must say the stories I have been hearing have dampened my initial enthusiasm considerably. I now wonder if it is worth our while. If "avocado toast and class warfare" are the main attractions nowadays, we can probably spend our time more wise…

I wouldn't bother with SF or Silicon Valley.

SV is really just office buildings. They don't have formal tours for visiting engineers or anything like that. Most of the campuses don't even have a visitor center.

As a tourist SF you get to avoid most of the really bad aspects of SF a bit but I don't really think it's a good tourist city. There's just not a whole lot to see that you can't see anywhere else.

To counter some of the suggestions elsewhere:

- The bridge is just a somewhat visually appealing bridge and it's often difficult to see due to fog.

- Muir Woods is a nice place but it's so heavily trafficked it feels more like a garden than a forest.

- Land's End is mainly special for its' view of the bridge I think.

I'm being a bit negative but these aren't bad sights and I don't regret going there as a bay area resident, I just don't think they're special enough to take a substantial amount of time out of an international trip.

I'd suggest: If you're after cities, head to the bigger ones like LA, New York or Chicago. If you're after culture and/or history go to the east coast (I think DC is probably the best place, it has the Smithsonian after all). If you want food, go south. If you're after natural beauty, the best places are pretty far from major cities (e.g. mountains, grand canyon, yellowstone).

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

#95

Post by xaedes »

lm28469 wrote: post #85
thinkingemote wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's not much to see in SV apart from the computer history museum, unless you like seeing parking lots and industrial buildings.

On the other hand there are many nice places around the valley. I think that's the only thing I miss from the valley, drive 40 min in any direction and you're either in a forest, a desert, on top of a mountain or at a sea side. I live in berlin now and it's quite the opposite, the city if full of life but the nature sucks for a good 200km radius. Mountain roads with nice view on top: https://www.google.com/maps/dir/3…

To be fair, 200km - which is quite a distance for a small country like Germany - around Berlin includes a LOT of nice nature areas, e.g.: Baltic Sea, Mecklenburg Lake Plateau, Saxon Switzerland, Harz, and many more.

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

#96

Post by lm28469 »

xaedes wrote: post #95
lm28469 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand there are many nice places around the valley. I think that's the only thing I miss from the valley, drive 40 min in any direction and you're either in a forest, a desert, on top of a mountain or at a sea side. I live in berlin now and it's quite the opposite, the city if full of life but the nature sucks for a good 200km radius. Mountain roads with nice view on top: https://www.google.com/maps/dir/3…

To be fair, 200km - which is quite a distance for a small country like Germany - around Berlin includes a LOT of nice nature areas, e.g.: Baltic Sea, Mecklenburg Lake Plateau, Saxon Switzerland, Harz, and many more.

Mecklenburg Lake Plateau is the only one under 200km though, anyway, it take some preparation to do that kind of trip.

Baltic Sea = 200km to the first coast

Saxon Switzerland = 250km

Harz = 275km

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

#97

Post by emblaegh »

cutler wrote: post #79
mcv wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But why? Why isn't all that wealth being used to make the city more livable? More affordable for the poor? More diverse?

It's called capitalism. So long as property is a free market instead of a public asset this trend will continue. It's not just SF. We're seeing it all over the West.

Housing is not a free market because its supply is artificially restricted by zoning regulations meant to protect the value of current homeowners' properties.

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

#98

Post by xaedes »

lm28469 wrote: post #96
xaedes wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, 200km - which is quite a distance for a small country like Germany - around Berlin includes a LOT of nice nature areas, e.g.: Baltic Sea, Mecklenburg Lake Plateau, Saxon Switzerland, Harz, and many more.

Mecklenburg Lake Plateau is the only one under 200km though, anyway, it take some preparation to do that kind of trip. Baltic Sea = 200km to the first coast Saxon Switzerland = 250km Harz = 275km

I measure geographical distance using google maps starting from Berlin (52.515277, 13.405301):

The german part of Saxon Switzerland is at most 200km. Distance through Dresden up to German-Czech border is 200km.

German coast of Baltic Sea is 200km, yes.

Brocken, highest "mountain" in Harz, and more or less its center, is 206km away.

Another nice area for canoeing or hiking is Jena/Naumburg(Saale) 200km south-west-ish.

Your distances are probably more useful though, when you want to get there, as I suspect them to be travel distances.

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

#99

Post by lm28469 »

xaedes wrote: post #98
lm28469 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mecklenburg Lake Plateau is the only one under 200km though, anyway, it take some preparation to do that kind of trip. Baltic Sea = 200km to the first coast Saxon Switzerland = 250km Harz = 275km

I measure geographical distance using google maps starting from Berlin (52.515277, 13.405301): The german part of Saxon Switzerland is at most 200km. Distance through Dresden up to German-Czech border is 200km. German coast of Baltic Sea is 200km, yes. Brocken, highest "mountain" in Harz, and more or less its center, is 206km away. Another nice area for canoeing or hiking is Jena/Naumburg(Saale) 200km south-west-ish.…

Ah yes indeed, I'm talking about traveling distance, I'd love to be able to fly there in a personal helicopter though.

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

#100

Post by atoav »

emblaegh wrote: post #97
cutler wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's called capitalism. So long as property is a free market instead of a public asset this trend will continue. It's not just SF. We're seeing it all over the West.

Housing is not a free market because its supply is artificially restricted by zoning regulations meant to protect the value of current homeowners' properties.

If you wanna get a flat in Berlin it is not uncommon to find 100 other people when you look for a flat.

Technically this is supply and demand at play that pushes the prices into fantasy land. Which means after years you will have locals thrown out of their flats because the prices have risen so drastically that only few landlords will take their tenants side.

Markets don’t value social stabilty and don’t give a damn about who lived there for how many generations and what they did for that place.

Is the rage of the displaced morally justified? Can a system that produces such results be desireable for a society as a whole?

Post reply on HN