Live data from Hacker News

The Hollywood sign debuted 100 years ago

latimes.com

61–70 of 142 posts

Re: The Hollywood sign debuted 100 years ago

#61
post #9
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's trivial, a mere signpost on a hill. many culturally significant things are like that -- valueless aside from some mythos or story that provides the value from somewhere other than worldy presence. The sign is trivial, but it symbolizes a lot of the same things that Hollywood itself has come to symbolize for many years. 'Going out to California to make it big' has been one of the slices of American Dream for a…

[flagged]

That’s why Indian movies are called “Bollywood”, Bengal “Tollywood”, Nigerian “Nollywood”.

Because… nobody ever heard of Hollywood?

Re: The Hollywood sign debuted 100 years ago

#62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hollywood is not only the oldest film industry in the world, it is also first in revenue. I bet that people around the world know about Hollywood and the top actors just like they know Coke everywhere. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_industry

Your own link refutes you. The oldest is the French film industry (Gaumont still exists & is the oldest studio still in operation), closely followed by the British film industry (notably Ealing Studios, still the oldest continuously working film facility too). Hell, the earliest American film industry was in Brooklyn. Hollywood happened initially due to it fleeing to the west coast to avoid patents (ironically) and l…

Yeah I find it ironic that the biggest proponents of what’s now called “intellectual property” are based where are they based, because they escaped high patents costs.

Re: The Hollywood sign debuted 100 years ago

#63
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, but not everyone can afford it. When there's a dearth of apartments and you can't afford your own detached house, you're forced to share a house with other people. People do not prefer sharing a house with roommates to having their own apartment. Also the idea that people's preferences should be encoded into bans on certain housing types is completely absurd to begin with.

There is no dearth of apartments. Apartments are everywhere. It's just silly to think that people are "forced" to live in single family homes.

Yes there is, and no they are not: See the increase in rents historically outpacing inflation in major metros.

Also please see the price increases in single family homes also historically outpacing inflation in major metros.

Build more of something, and dare I say it, maybe let's let the market decide what and where.

Re: The Hollywood sign debuted 100 years ago

#64
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that loads of people are fine with apartments because of the price/convenience/location. If you ask a young couple "would you rather pay $1500/month to be in an apartment or $3000/month to be in a SFH", you think everyone is choosing the latter?

Once they have kids, almost everyone who can afford it chooses a home in the quietest and safest neighborhood they can get into. Apartments are fun when you are young and want to live downtown and enjoy the restaurants and the night life. When you get older and want your home to be a refuge and raise a family, apartments really suck.

> who can afford it

And there your argument falls apart; vast majority can’t afford it. Policy you advocate has caused a housing shortage.

Re: The Hollywood sign debuted 100 years ago

#65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any solution that involves shared walls with neighbors is not desirable to the vast majority of Americans. Anyone who wants to live in apartments can do so. Nobody is forced to live in single-family homes -- on the contrary, we work long and hard to afford the money to get into them because they are better than listening to our neighbors all the time.

That's a big claim with nothing backing it up.

[deleted]

Re: The Hollywood sign debuted 100 years ago

#67
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NYC density: 26,403 people per square mile (source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_New_York_Cit... ) Hollywood density: 22,193 people per square mile Koreatown density: 42,611 people per square mile Source: https://maps.latimes.com/neighborhoods/population/density/ne... Yes, greater LA area also has a lot of what people like to call “sprawl”, but it’s a big place and has many different neighborhoods.…

> but it’s a big place and has many different neighborhoods. That's called sprawl.

LA's size is from annexing other cities and towns.

Re: The Hollywood sign debuted 100 years ago

#68
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but it’s a big place and has many different neighborhoods. That's called sprawl.

Instead of dismissing with derogatory terms, you should try to actually get to know these. You’d realize that Santa Monica is very different from West Hollywood, which is also different from Hollywood, K-town, etc. Even in the valleys, Sherman Oaks is very different from Agoura. OC would take years to really get to know as well. When you look at areal/satellite imagery, Santa Barbara to San Diego is basically connect…

> Instead of dismissing with derogatory terms, you should try to actually get to know these.

Instead of dismissing an objective truth as derogatory, you should get to know the word.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_sprawl

Los Angeles is the most infamous example, and you can look at its evolution here: https://la.curbed.com/2014/4/3/10121264/los-angeles-sprawl-h...

Sprawl isn't a derogatory term, it's a descriptive one. Likewise just because enclaves have a unique character and governance doesn't mean they're not the outcome of sprawl. Please don't find yourself so easily offended.

(I've got almost three years of experience in the LA area largely in a box comprised of Encino, Venice, DTLA, and Burbank, if it adds any credibility to the point. Certainly not a lifetime resident but enough to have my way memorized pretty much everywhere and know why my favorite little place is Sawtelle. Everything in that box is unique, but nevertheless... it's still sprawl)

Hope this helps.

Re: The Hollywood sign debuted 100 years ago

#69
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s because people want to live in low rise buildings. The average person in California (and in the rest of the country) desires to live in a detached home that they own. It is not wrong to want that. However, it is definitely wrong to assume that high-rise apartments are “proper” density and that LA is doing it wrong. LA is the way the people live there want it to be. If you want high density and high-rise living…

There's a false choice presented here, about choosing to live in high rise/high density. Even NYC basically peters out to low rises just out of brooklyn! The overall problem, though, is that these density restrictions cause a nasty spiral. People looking for work are asked to move to one of these cities where their bosses own these wonderful homes. They mostly have to rent. Rent is high. Supply is low, so it's hard t…

> There are ~no good rural jobs.

This depends on your definition of a 'good job'. If this is about pay, yes, wages in the countryside are lower - but so are living costs. If I average over my contacts, people working rurally seem to be generally happier with their occupation, though.

> and other whining from people who would rather have their yard than replace that with a larger public park...

If I have the choice between my own yard, where I can park my barbecue grill, and a public park, which most likely will become a magnet for the homeless/drug user population, I know what I will choose.

People who believe public recreation infrastructure is the way to go ascribe an ideal to a public park that is rarely ever met - they live in a world where parks come right out of Edwardian England, with well-maintained flower beds and fences around them, where a park custodian closes the park at night[1]. The problem with that: That is incredibly expensive.

So parks are lucky if they get their grass cut regularly, and are relatively calm areas to sleep in at night. The problem now is that with homeless/drug user populations, the area becomes 'unsafe' for local residents, who will now avoid that park, at which point it loses all it's recreational value.

So ... why would I give up my own little yard, which I maintain, which is relatively safe, for a block-sized open sewer where it is only a matter of time for someone who ought to be in a mental hospital to shank me?

[1] ... and ironically, that type of park was not public either - it was private property often owned by the landlord, and you had to have a residents-only key to access many of those.

Re: The Hollywood sign debuted 100 years ago

#70
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your own reference seems to confirm OP's point that sprawl, not density, is what increased. Relatively few places in the greater LA area have properly dense housing projects, and you just have to look across LA from vantage points along either Mulholland drive or Rancho Palos Verdes to see for yourself. Plenty of opportunity for high-rise and even more mid-rise projects, but nearly everything is low-rise. Thankfully…

That’s because people want to live in low rise buildings. The average person in California (and in the rest of the country) desires to live in a detached home that they own. It is not wrong to want that. However, it is definitely wrong to assume that high-rise apartments are “proper” density and that LA is doing it wrong. LA is the way the people live there want it to be. If you want high density and high-rise living…

If this were the case, we'd see it in the zoning with a lot of parcels being underbuilt for what they are zoned for, since low density is preferred over high density. Instead, the city is developed to upwards of 90% of its zoned capacity. Its gotten to the point where no more units can be built, the zoning has to change in order to make it possible to permit more units. The high prices are all because the job growth in the area has outpaced new housing unit construction, which cannot accelerate to meet demand for housing by labor due to present day zoning.

https://la.curbed.com/2015/4/8/9972362/everything-wrong-with...

Post reply on HN