31–40 of 154 posts
Honest question: why would any new tech entrepreneur want to move to SF? The prices suck, and if you need to improve your network you can meet the vast majority of tech people online (IRC, Discord, email, online conferences). Weather?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It isn't quite clear to me. What agenda and who does it benefit? Where's the connection to the New York Times itself?
The decline of SF is seen as an indictment of progressivism run amok. From a card-carrying progressive Ezra Klein: “If progressivism can’t work there, why should the country believe it can work anywhere else?” https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/11/opinion/california-san-fr...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is a major tech center. Probably easier to get VC money, make serendipitous connections, maybe hire talent. (Though, arguably, the advantages are less than they used to be and the disadvantages greater.) And not weather directly but there are a fair number of tech people who, to the hiring point, have trouble imaging living other places because of some combination of weather and culture (and choice of jobs without…
> maybe hire talent Are most of the bay area developers bay area natives? I was under the impression they were mostly immigrants under H1B contracts that could live anywhere in the US.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've been to Austin. I felt trapped in a flat plane of existence in Texas. I need mountains to escape to on my time off. But as a native Californian, I hope a lot of people move out to Texas. Several million would be a good start.
Did you spend any time in the hill country on the south/west parts of town? They have a very different feel than the flat parts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It isn't quite clear to me. What agenda and who does it benefit? Where's the connection to the New York Times itself?
The decline of SF is seen as an indictment of progressivism run amok. From a card-carrying progressive Ezra Klein: “If progressivism can’t work there, why should the country believe it can work anywhere else?” https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/11/opinion/california-san-fr...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It isn't quite clear to me. What agenda and who does it benefit? Where's the connection to the New York Times itself?
The decline of SF is seen as an indictment of progressivism run amok. From a card-carrying progressive Ezra Klein: “If progressivism can’t work there, why should the country believe it can work anywhere else?” https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/11/opinion/california-san-fr...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The decline of SF is seen as an indictment of progressivism run amok. From a card-carrying progressive Ezra Klein: “If progressivism can’t work there, why should the country believe it can work anywhere else?” https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/11/opinion/california-san-fr...
How is massive consolidation of wealth for VCs and unicorn startups, fueled by a speculative investment environment, seen as "progressive?"
I’ve seen plenty of progressives claim “they aren’t true progressives” but that comes across as a bit of a “no true Scotsman” argument that you hear from defenders of communism.
And it begs the question - if no one has been able to attain “true” whatever, is it really even an option?
Honest question: why would any new tech entrepreneur want to move to SF? The prices suck, and if you need to improve your network you can meet the vast majority of tech people online (IRC, Discord, email, online conferences). Weather?
I recently founded an early stage startup. The only reason I can proffer is imposter syndrome. There’s a certain nagging feeling that we’ll never be a “real startup” until we have offices in the Bay Area. And sometimes that views externalized by others. You run into a scenario where you’re talking to someone who’s excited about your tech and vision. Then you mention you’re located in suburban Florida and their enthus…
Florida, though, jesus...
Who pays for these kinds of articles? Is there some PR firm Big Tech funds to get these kinds of articles? Just doesn't seem like the type of stuff NYTimes really cares about but I guess clicks is all that matters.
It is quite clear that with these types of articles, NYTimes is pushing an agenda.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is massive consolidation of wealth for VCs and unicorn startups, fueled by a speculative investment environment, seen as "progressive?"
That’s a bit of a cop out. The Bay Area had some of the most progressive politicians and progressive policies in the country. I’ve seen plenty of progressives claim “they aren’t true progressives” but that comes across as a bit of a “no true Scotsman” argument that you hear from defenders of communism. And it begs the question - if no one has been able to attain “true” whatever, is it really even an option?
EDIT since you added more: it's not about a purity test for different shades of progressivism, it's that a hyper-capitalistic corporate investment market converging on one city is literally the opposite of anything progressivism has ever claimed to be.