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

San Francisco

antirez.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 267 posts

Re: San Francisco

#81

Post by objclxt »

adw wrote: post #39
kryten wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like London, UK where I currently reside with three children... Expensive: check. Bad schools: check. Disfunctional government: check. Drugs on streets: check. Lots of crazies: check. The thing I hate is that people wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. Going to move out to the countryside I think... As for the nutter on BART, I got urinated on whilst on the tube in London .... twice. And no I was not on f…

SF is way worse (I used to live in Finsbury Park, now live in the Mission).

Yeah, I'd agree with that. I've lived in both. This is not to say that parts of London aren't dodgy, but SF is I think both subjectively and quantifiably worse.

For example, London has around 500 people sleeping rough each night. San Francisco has almost ten times as many, between 3-5,000 (mainly because a winter's night in SF is rather more survivable than a London one).

More subjectively, I think public transport in London far surpasses SF, both in terms of safety and quality (...Friday nights excepted, but I think that's par the course of any large city).

[1]: London figures from here (http://www.thamesreach.org.uk/news-and-views/homelessness-fa...), SF figures from here (http://www.sfgate.com/homeless/)

Re: San Francisco

#82

Post by objclxt »

DanBC wrote: post #79
spitx wrote: post #55

kryten: Sounds like London, UK where I currently reside with three children... Does your experience of life in London in recent years (since around late nineties) reflect that of this writer? I think this is one of the few writers (on the topic) I've found balanced and non-alarmist. That's the reason I've used her piece to moot a point that has been posited by many others in a more judgmental and accusative tone. So…

That's just typical Telegraph[1] hateful anti-immigration stuff. perhaps somewhere buried in there are a few grains of truthy material; did multi-culturalism cause ghettos? etc. > Nowadays, though, most of the tills in my local shops are manned by young Muslim men who mutter into their mobiles as they are serving. How does the author know they are muslim? > I see London turning into a place almost exclusively for poo…

Yeah, I'd agree with you that The Telegraph isn't the most balanced of sources when it comes to immigration. It's an overtly right-wing paper.

Re: San Francisco

#83

Post by agilebyte »

physcab wrote: post #46

San Francisco truly is a wonderful city, all things considered. I'm currently traveling throughout Europe and while I'm having a blast seeing how another portion of the world lives, I'm more thankful than ever I can call my home SF. It has temperate weather, is relatively clean, Napa, Stinson Beach, and Pt Reyes to the North, Pacifica, Santa Cruz, Monterey to the South. Tahoe for skiing and summer fun is 4 hours away…

When talking about singles you mean men right?

Re: San Francisco

#84

Post by Flying_Dwarf »

spitx wrote: post #65
Flying_Dwarf wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm struggling to find what this has to do with San Francisco? Are you saying SF has been taken over by hipsters and is no longer recognizable as it once were?

You needn't struggle so much to find parallels, if you were to even glance cursorily. While the general validity and the degree to which this writer's experience is shared by others can certainly be debated (which is the reason I tabled it in the first place), the fact that there are strong parallels cannot be contested. The agents and parties affected in the two settings, London and S.F., could indeed be different.…

> The agents and parties affected in the two settings, London and S.F., could indeed be different. Nonetheless, the theme remains the same.

Not really. The OP's theme is simply culture-shock and coming to terms.

Your linked piece is xenophobia and anti-immigration, the complete opposite of views held by most technologist in San Francisco and the wider Silicon Valley.

Re: San Francisco

#85

Post by 2pasc »

lakethun wrote: post #68
2pasc wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that this argument about kids in San Francisco is totally wrong. There are tons of kids in San Francisco...just not in the neighborhood that he went! Go to the Richmond, the Sunset, the Marina, Cole Valley, or especially Noe Valley...and you will see tons of kids. But sure, in SOMA or Union Square/Financial District...not so much. Why is that ? Because San Francisco is a very neighborhood-focused city - where…

Your impressions are incorrect. From a comment above: Persons under 18 (2010 Census) US 23.7% [2] SF 13.5% [3] [2] http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html [3] http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/06075.html

Well... Many families are also in the suburbs (South Bay or East Bay) as the weather tends to be better and you can have houses with gardens for the kids to play around (also the school system is less messed up there). Which does not mean that there are not kids-full neighborhoods in the city.

Re: San Francisco

#86

Post by meerita »

I want a SF job but work remotely from Barcelona. I'm willing to travel 1 a month :). I know the pains of work and live there, it looks amazing but all my friends told me the same: it feels artificial.

I like Europe, with their pro/cons.

Re: San Francisco

#87

Post by pfarrell »

I moved to the Bay Area, with my family, 8 months ago. We tried to make SF work (and did live in temporary housing in SOMA for three months), but SF is not a place for young children (unless you are beyond financial constraints). I commute to SOMA every day from Rockridge. Rockridge is nice, except for Oakland's inability to provide an adequately sized police force!

All the tech things antirez outlined are true, but the reality is, it took some commitment and blind faith to move out with a family and no friends or contacts. Its like moving to another country :). There is more of everything in SF (bay area really), success and destitution, beauty and ugliness, brilliant people and charlatans, opportunity and desperation. I'm loving it, but it's a balancing act.

Re: San Francisco

#88

Post by lobotryas »

ryanSrich wrote: post #80

Eh. They can keep it. • Average engineering salary in sf: 116K / year [1] • Average rent for a one bedroom: $2,700 / month [2] After taxes you're coming in around 72k / year - 32k / year for rent You'll have roughly 40k to play with. That may sound like a lot but factor in food, health care, travel, energy, internet, phone, and numerous miscellaneous expenses and you'll be hard pressed to save anything over 10k a yea…

You are forgetting the weather.

DC winters: cold, snow, sometimes blizzard, have to scrape your car free from ice if you don't have indoor parking.

SF winters: sometimes you have to put in a jacket and sometimes it rains. That's it.

This is just one example of many. It's pointless to compare two cities on rent and cost of living alone. Now, if the extra 11k is worth the winter challenges to you then I'm happy. Personally, I'm unable to imagine myself going back to east coast weather ever again.

Re: San Francisco

#89

Post by spitx »

objclxt wrote: post #82
DanBC wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's just typical Telegraph[1] hateful anti-immigration stuff. perhaps somewhere buried in there are a few grains of truthy material; did multi-culturalism cause ghettos? etc. > Nowadays, though, most of the tills in my local shops are manned by young Muslim men who mutter into their mobiles as they are serving. How does the author know they are muslim? > I see London turning into a place almost exclusively for poo…

Yeah, I'd agree with you that The Telegraph isn't the most balanced of sources when it comes to immigration. It's an overtly right-wing paper.

Why is the slant of the source relevant?

This is the opinion of one person.

I tabled it to invite dissenting voices to offer sensible and rational critiques of the premise not petty and bitter ideologues who want to silence all dissonant viewpoints even when they may have more than a shred of truth value.

There are plenty of such people on sites like Gawker.

I thought this place was a platform for sensible and intellectually upright discussion.

Re: San Francisco

#90

Post by Throwadev »

pfarrell wrote: post #87

I moved to the Bay Area, with my family, 8 months ago. We tried to make SF work (and did live in temporary housing in SOMA for three months), but SF is not a place for young children (unless you are beyond financial constraints). I commute to SOMA every day from Rockridge. Rockridge is nice, except for Oakland's inability to provide an adequately sized police force! All the tech things antirez outlined are true, but…

Can you elaborate on lack of police? Have you been affected by the crime in Rockridge? I thought it was a pretty decent area the last time I visited.
Post reply on HN