Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy • Hacker News Board

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#401

Post by shuckles » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 7:42 PM UTC

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #388

shuckles wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think New York in the 70s can be explained by its own governance alone, so I object to your characterization of New York in the 70s being the result of its own failings. The state and federal governments basically abandoned the place ("Ford to City: Drop Dead"), and something similar is happening to San Francisco as well. What a loss for the country, as the next Silicon Valley, if there is one, likely won't b…

Becoming so hated that people want you to fail is arguably "the result of its own failings" regardless of whether the subject is NYC then or SF now.

The urban vs. rural culture war in politics has little to do with inherent value and everything to do with resource allocation in an government system that allocates highly leveraged influence to the individuals on one side.

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#402

Post by devilduck » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 7:43 PM UTC

Afton wrote: post #387

nph5667 wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From my own experience, it's just not a good time to change a job no matter how enticing it sounds.

I started a new job in April. Between when I interviewed and when I was started, offices shut down. It's been great. The fact that everyone is remote is actually a great 'leveler', since the company has a 'main office' and a few satellite offices in other cities. I'm not affiliated with the 'main office', but I actually am concerned that I'll suffer career-wise once the company goes back to in-office, since I'll be i…

I think it's a mistake to believe that being part of an office culture somehow makes you more valuable. You could still be quickly cut by a company focused on the bottom line.

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#403

Post by JMTQp8lwXL » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 7:45 PM UTC

ylhert wrote: post #33

Tech in SFBA reminds me of the Resource curse ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse ). SFBA did nothing special to attract the wealth of technology companies, they effectively got lucky with Shockley/Fairchild/Traitorous 8 and the boom in technology that followed. It seems the local gov't have squandered an opportunity to truly capitalize on the gift they were given, and perhaps even done their best to jeopa…

A local government is only as good as its people. It's people squandered it, though forcing egregious zoning regulations that's leading to the exodus. They claimed profits to the point where it damaged their ability to collect further profits.

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#404

Post by corytheboyd » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 7:46 PM UTC

oblio wrote: post #384

vmception wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You see the irony right? I'm only mocking the gatekeeping done in SF but they'd say you would have no claim to "watching SF die" if you moved there in the last ten years, because you killed it. Rents have only dropped to levels seen in the last few years lol, and will just "crater" to 2010 levels once tech and students finish leaving.

I've visited San Francisco a few times. It's reasonably nice but it's also one of the smallest cities, population wise, out of cities with similar impact. It's also chock full of building with 1-2-3 floors. It's absolutely ridiculous, a city of its magnitude should have 2-3 times its current population and 0 housing issues due to higher density housing. The newcomers aren't to blame, as an outsider I'd blame the loca…

It’s in part old money lobbying to keep their properties out of the shade. Not even joking, I think it’s really that petty. There is a huge negative NIMBY force in this city

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#405

Post by sudo-i » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 7:46 PM UTC

grillvogel wrote: post #374

bigyikes wrote: post #13

As it happens, tomorrow I’m putting in my 30-day notice to terminate my lease and leave the Bay. (And I’m paying 2 additional months rent in fees to do so) Not being tied to the office fundamentally changes the calculus of choosing where to live. There just aren’t good reasons to live here anymore for so many of us. Even if you enjoy the area, chances are you can get a better deal by moving just a bit further away. A…

what happens if everyone goes back to the office in a year and now you're the only remote employee?

Yes, this is what I worry about too.

I've been hearing remote work is the future for many years now, but haven't seen much movement toward the goal.

Now, we are in a pandemic and everyone is forced to be at home, not by choice, but by necessity.

Everyone is still saying remote work is now accelerated, but no one had a choice if they wanted to work remotely or not...

Of course there will be some increase in remote working after the pandemic, but I think the vast majority is going to return to the office.

Not because they can't work from home, but just because they don't want to work from home.

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#406

Post by ska » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 7:46 PM UTC

codemac wrote: post #189

xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I lived in SV for a decade and worked in SF for most of that. > WFH might not stick widely If the vast majority of workers demand it, then I don't think employers will have a choice here. Leaving now is a vote with your feet. > unenforceable non-competes Very few of my peers have ever cared about this in practice. I don't think this is remotely a major benefit compared to e.g. state taxes. > fantastic weather and sur…

> Very few of my peers have ever cared about this in practice. I don't think this is remotely a major benefit compared to e.g. state taxes. Well, while working in RTP I saw many suits filed for my coworkers for non-compete clauses. If you're ~director or above, this matters a lot and the bigco's basically auto file the lawsuit in any jurisdiction where enforceable. At least one exec I reported to had to take a year o…

> At least one exec I reported to had to take a year off as a result of these lawsuits.

Yes, it is a bigger issue on both sides of the table when you get to director+ level. The company often has much more to lose, and the employee often has far fewer potential new homes. These things tend to balance out; I've seen contracts with non-compete timeline matched or exceeded by severance timeline for that reason.

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#407

Post by dwwmtat » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 7:46 PM UTC

gumby wrote: post #152

ylhert wrote: post #33

Tech in SFBA reminds me of the Resource curse ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse ). SFBA did nothing special to attract the wealth of technology companies, they effectively got lucky with Shockley/Fairchild/Traitorous 8 and the boom in technology that followed. It seems the local gov't have squandered an opportunity to truly capitalize on the gift they were given, and perhaps even done their best to jeopa…

Come on: there’s a beautiful A/B test you can consult: in the 50s, 60s, and 70s, Boston’s route 128 was the “Silicon Valley” of its time. The US poured even more money into it than they did the Bay Area. Yet which grew and which stagnated?

There are so many differences between Boston’s route 128 and SFBA that it makes a pretty awful A/B test.

I’ve lived and worked in both. None of the things I prefer about SF have anything to do with the efforts of local governments.

If anything, I’d agree that the local governments efforts and misguided policies are responsible for most of what I dislike most about living in SF.

So much is handled so incredibly poorly, but everyone’s willing to put up with it for proximity to a giant money-making machine spewing wealth around.

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#408

Post by BurningFrog » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 7:46 PM UTC

sandworm101 wrote: post #89

bigyikes wrote: post #13

As it happens, tomorrow I’m putting in my 30-day notice to terminate my lease and leave the Bay. (And I’m paying 2 additional months rent in fees to do so) Not being tied to the office fundamentally changes the calculus of choosing where to live. There just aren’t good reasons to live here anymore for so many of us. Even if you enjoy the area, chances are you can get a better deal by moving just a bit further away. A…

>> and still come out ahead financially. Ya. Earning a SF wage but living elsewhere is great. But there is a flip side to this coin. As employees realize they can work from home, employers also realize they can have employees work from home. They will soon realize they don't need to pay SF wages. Those who convert their in-office jobs into work-from-home are a covid oddity. Those who will be hired in the future on th…

I've seen a lot of predictions for "races for the bottom" over the years, and yet it's hard to remember one that actually happened.

Economies usually don't work like that.

Even if some version of that happens, it will still pay off to move out of SF.

I think one of the big problems in the US is that growth and wealth are concentrated to a few hyper rich coastal cities, where most people can't afford to move. While large parts of the country is relatively impoverished.

If that ends up being spread around more evenly, I think that's only good. Even if I personally might get a pay cut.

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#409

Post by akhilcacharya » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 7:46 PM UTC

rmk wrote: post #308

akhilcacharya wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but my experience is that most parents say private schools do a better job This sounds more like classism to me.

It is not. Remember that public schools (they are essentially free for the parents) are competing with private schools that are charging 20k+ per year per pupil. Most people who have to work for a living will not shell out 20k+ or (50-60k if there are siblings involved) simply because they are classist: they see clear advantages in private schools. This year, most bay area public schools are online. Many private scho…

> Most people who have to work for a living will not shell out 20k+ or (50-60k if there are siblings involved) simply because they are classist: they see clear advantages in private schools.

Im not sure why that would rule out classism.

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#410

Post by dougmwne » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 7:47 PM UTC

scarmig wrote: post #270

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #70

I'd love to hear from people who want to stay in the Bay area what is unique that you cannot find elsewhere in cheaper locales. I lived in Mountain View for 3 months during 500 startups and the valley proper was the most garden variety suburban existence you could find anywhere. I lived in SF proper off and on and can attest that it certainly has (had?) fantastic restaurants/shops and a particular type of culture tha…

1) SF & Valley: Education levels of the people here. You can get that in a couple other places--DC, NYC, Boston--but not too many others. Relatedly, two easily accessible world class universities are in the Bay Area: Boston beats us here, but we beat NYC and DC. 2) SF & Valley: Diversity. Bay Area cities top the list of largest number of foreign born residents, with only LA and NYC being competitive. 3) SF & Valley:…

I have lived in both SF and DC and think a few of your points are maybe a bit unfair to the east coast. I found DC's public transit and walkability to be quite a bit better than SF. True, the weather is less perfect, and maybe I am resistant to humidity and mild cold, but I generally found it pleasant to be outside for 9 months of the year. DC absolutely had a lot of diversity, partially due to immigration, but also because the government pulls in people from all countries and all walks of life. It is really the opposite of a monoculture since there is really a bit of everything under the sun there. The Smithsonian is a worldwide magnet for art and culture. You also trade SF's weirdness for one of the most historically interesting places in the country.

On the nature front, there are really a lot of great public lands on the east coast. They are a bit less iconic than what you can find on the west coast, but you can still hike, camp, climb, ski and beach to your heart's content.

I think comparing SF to DC and Boston makes the most sense just due to similar size. LA and NYC are in a class of their own.