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

The Street Kids of San Francisco

blog.priceonomics.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 210 posts

Re: The Street Kids of San Francisco

#161

Post by spitx »

bcoates wrote: post #113
SilasX wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The bill helps protect homeless people from discrimination in employment, ..." |face-palm|

There appears to be some goofy stuff in there, but giving them somewhere to defecate so they don't do it where I'd like to walk would be worth every penny. This is basic public health stuff.

We're rivaling some sub-continental regions in open defecation densities.

The Mission comes a close third to the Haight and the Tenderloin.

Perhaps Mr. Dorsey is attending to the wrong neighborhoods.

https://twitter.com/jack/status/289809936421109760

Re: The Street Kids of San Francisco

#162

Post by creamyhorror »

jes5199 wrote: post #38
il wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did you connect with that crowd? I've noticed a very high overlap between techies and hippies, there doesn't seem to be an easy way to stumble into a group of discordians short of randomly wandering the streets shouting "hail eris!".

In the bay area, there's a constant stream of events that are in the spirit of the Cacophony Society - for example, http://allworldsfair.com/ , or the Lost Horizon Night Market ( http://blog.sfgate.com/inthemission/2010/12/13/guerrilla-nig... ) - and these things are put on by a community of people that's actually fairly small - I'm not sure they'd all self-identify as "Discordian" but, as a Discordian myself, I'll c…

This is seriously making me want to move to SF, because events as artfully crazy as these simply can't happen with any regularity in Singapore. There's just no cultural history for them to - no support or interest from the very pragmatic, have-to-be-up-early-tomorrow society over here. Sames goes for the very chill party mentioned by angersock: it just couldn't happen.

When I lived in Philadelphia I don't think there were regular events of that nature, so I guess it's mostly a Bay Area/SF thing? Manhattan certainly seemed more lively in that regard.

Re: The Street Kids of San Francisco

#163

Post by edderly »

ghshephard wrote: post #109

The one question that I always ask (and instantly makes me unpopular) of the hippie/transient/counter-culture types, is, "Do you realize you would all likely be dead of hunger withing two to three weeks without a massively efficient capitalist system supporting you?" They are able to exist because of people who are willing to work to support them. Even the communes rely on fertilizer, fuels, metals, foodstuffs from 2…

I think it's an interesting and reasonable question but I'm not sure the basis of the question is correct.

First, the 2000+ years of capitalism assertion is fairly flawed, consider feudalism, but for the sake of argument lets say capitalism goes hand in hand with industrial revolution era.

Then when you say 'massively efficient capitalist system' it seems like you're referring to a "net efficiency" in terms of production of wealth, and that allows a community of grifters to benefit from that as a kind of downstream recipient.

You are touching upon a valid point, this lifestyle is a function of current society and it appears to be parasitic rather than self-sustaining. However, I would argue that this demonstrates that current capitalism is actually pretty inefficient to allow this.

Re: The Street Kids of San Francisco

#164

Post by eli_awry »

moxie wrote: post #128
eli_awry wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't had exposure to the hacker houses on the West Coast, so I can't really speak to that. The motives of hackers I've known usually have to do with impacting the world and making it better for more people. I've been in punk houses with hackers, but we mostly had parties with art people, and collaborated with anarchists. I'm not talking about the Silicon Valley startup scene, which I know nothing about. I'm movi…

Perhaps my perspective is tainted by living in the bay area through two (three?) tech bubbles, however I still don't see it. I agree that HN-type hackers and anarchists both use aesthetically similar language, like "changing the world," but I think that means something substantially different in each context. My sense is that when tech people talk about changing the world, they generally mean keeping the form of the…

My perspective is this: I want to make really awesome intelligent tutoring systems. I'm inspired by Enders Game, Diamond Age, and the Aristotle essay by Hillis. I want to do this because I think that the current model for distributing education privileges people who are already very advantaged, but an intelligent tutoring system could be reproduced over and over and over for free. I obviously love Khan Academy, which is being made static and delivered to places with limited/no internet connection. I think that this is radical because the vision is to use technology and the fact that things are so replicable to essentially destroy educational inequality. If you could make an educational system good enough, and distribute it widely enough, then I think that would really change the world. I want to be part of making that happen, and I'm an AI and cognitive science person, so I'm working on the tutor part.

But even this vision has so many things that other hackers are working on. Just making the net more efficient, or creating better wireless systems, or cheaper technology (or even better, technology that people can make themselves). Or empowering people to use Arduinos and to hack their own open source stuff. Or producing pedagogical content and translating it into other languages. I feel like a world in which everyone has total access to an amazing education is a world-changing proposition, and lots of hackers are working on things that really bring us closer to that.

Also I personally think that the thing that is wrong with the government is unequal application of laws and illegal hiding of government activity. I'm not convinced that there's not a place for laws, police, and taxes in a totally just society. I think that anyone who is working to destroy the (really widespread) lies and spying and unequal treatment and unjust policies and sociopathic violence of the government is doing something that, if it succeeds, will result in a truly different world. One where the laws aren't different for people depending on their class, and violence by the state is not tolerated.

I'm not claiming that working for education, diy technology, government accountability or a total overhaul of the legal system is more revolutionary than being an insurrectionist or running a totally awesome Food Not Bombs. I'm just saying that there's this idea of a better world, a fundamentally different world where things make sense and capricious cruelty is gone and everyone is essentially free to pursue the future they want and self-actualize instead of worrying about where the day's calories will come from or if it's safe to go outside. If we can have that world, I don't care if it's in an anarcho-syndicalist form, a set of independent microcountries, or just a very very reformed version of the constitutional democracies we have now. I see cheap, open source 3D printers and Food Not Bombs as having a similar mission.

I'll sum this up with a quote from an Evan Greer song "I want something that's better than this, and I'm not sure exactly what it is, but I think that we could build it if we try together."

Re: The Street Kids of San Francisco

#165

Post by lutusp »

creamyhorror wrote: post #162
jes5199 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the bay area, there's a constant stream of events that are in the spirit of the Cacophony Society - for example, http://allworldsfair.com/ , or the Lost Horizon Night Market ( http://blog.sfgate.com/inthemission/2010/12/13/guerrilla-nig... ) - and these things are put on by a community of people that's actually fairly small - I'm not sure they'd all self-identify as "Discordian" but, as a Discordian myself, I'll c…

This is seriously making me want to move to SF, because events as artfully crazy as these simply can't happen with any regularity in Singapore. There's just no cultural history for them to - no support or interest from the very pragmatic, have-to-be-up-early-tomorrow society over here. Sames goes for the very chill party mentioned by angersock: it just couldn't happen. When I lived in Philadelphia I don't think there…

> This is seriously making me want to move to SF, because events as artfully crazy as these simply can't happen with any regularity in Singapore.

If you're serious, I should tell you that SF is by some estimates the most expensive city in the world:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/22/most-expensive-city...

Also, having lived there myself for years, it's cold most of the year except in August and September, and because of its setting it's difficult to get to or from anywhere else (bridges and crowded freeways). And finally, it's very pretty and it has enormous charm.

Re: The Street Kids of San Francisco

#166

Post by rdtsc »

johngalt wrote: post #108
moxie wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's an old wobbly story: A wobbly was riding a freight train across the midwest one summer, in between jobs. The train sided out in the middle of nowhere, and it was scorching hot, so the wobbly got off the train and started walking down a dirt road. After a couple of miles, the road passed by an apple orchard. The wobbly hopped over the fence, and sat down to rest under the shade of a big apple tree. The wobbly…

Here's a justification for private property. How will there ever be an orchard otherwise ? Orchards don't just burst spontaneously into existence. Imagine that no one 'fought the natives for it'. Instead the land was a vacant waste with no one living there and nothing growing there. Over the years through hard work, dedication and sacrifice the land was amended and the trees grew creating the orchard. The only thing…

> Instead the land was a vacant waste with no one living there and nothing growing there.

Funny that is the childish misconception I had as a child about America before settlers came here. Just an empty lush land, as gift of God, waiting to embrace its new owners.

Re: The Street Kids of San Francisco

#167

Post by cmccabe »

steveklabnik wrote: post #125
Locke1689 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see why you need a broad intellectual foundation here. Property is granted by governments. Why? Because it's a useful abstraction. Where did the government get the property? It claimed it and enforced its claim by force. So I guess my answer to the story would be: fine, you can fight the owner for it, but the real owner isn't me, it's the United States government. If you are so inclined to fight the governmen…

> Property is granted by governments. Why? Because it's a useful abstraction. This is where that 'broad intellectual foundation' comes in. You may think that it is, sure, but why? Not everyone does, and there's a whole lot of philosophical discussion on this very topic. Our conception of 'private property' has only been around ~200 years, and humanity's been around just a bit more than that.

So you think private property was invented in 1813?

I guess the War of 1812 was more important than anyone could have dreamed at the time?

You really need to read more. Like... a lot more.

Re: The Street Kids of San Francisco

#168

Post by [deleted] »

steveklabnik wrote: post #126
md224 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> On the other hand, they're in denial about capitalism. Could you expand on the flaws in their disdain of capitalism? Or, if that's too broad a question, perhaps direct us to some reading material on the subject? I don't mean this in a snarky or side-taking manner... in fact I'm struggling with my own views on capitalism and would love to expand my knowledge on the issue.

Here's the basics, from an anarchist/communist perspective: http://blog.steveklabnik.com/posts/2012-03-31-anti-capitalis...

[deleted]

Re: The Street Kids of San Francisco

#169

Post by ghshephard »

thisrod wrote: post #119
ghshephard wrote: post #109

The one question that I always ask (and instantly makes me unpopular) of the hippie/transient/counter-culture types, is, "Do you realize you would all likely be dead of hunger withing two to three weeks without a massively efficient capitalist system supporting you?" They are able to exist because of people who are willing to work to support them. Even the communes rely on fertilizer, fuels, metals, foodstuffs from 2…

Where I live, the answer might run as follows. For fifty thousand years, the local hippies avoided starvation with a one-hour workday. Now that the place is full to bursting point with slaves of some massively efficient system, they have to work a bit harder. And, unless you can photosynthesize, you're a parasite too.

The point that I probably failed to make, is that trying to drop out of the work-for-wages/acquire capital/hire-people/produce goods ecosystem only works as long as you have a lot of people prepared to work-for-wages/acquire capital/hire-people/produce goods who will create the environment that keeps you alive.

I would never besmirch the good name of the sun, nor suggest that we don't all depend on it. I think we can all agree that we've greatly benefited from living within the sun's ecosystem.

Re: The Street Kids of San Francisco

#170

Post by argonaut »

vacri wrote: post #158
Locke1689 wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only person to mention the federal government was you.

but the real owner isn't me, it's the United States government - Locke1689, 5 hours ago I am not an American, but I've been online for nearly 20 years now, and I've seen a lot of US politics pass under the bridge. I've never seen anything that goes contrary to the notion that 'the United States government' is 'the federal government [of the US]'. The two terms are used interchangably in online discourse in my experie…

The fact that you're arguing over the synonymous/non-synonymous semantics of two phrases, rather than actually refuting locke's main point, says a great deal about your argument.
Post reply on HN