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

How the Internet Ruined San Francisco (1999)

salon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 62 posts

Re: How the Internet Ruined San Francisco (1999)

#21

Post by Naritai »

smoyer wrote: post #19

I don't want to sound callous but ... market forces shape and reshape cities all the time. When the facets of city-life in San Francisco that initially drew people fade away, people will flock somewhere else and the rents will stagnate or reverse. And if San Francisco is losing its allure as an artist's hub, perhaps other places (such as downtown Detroit) are compensating? I live in a reasonably affluent smaller city…

What seems ridiculous to me is that the city that's absorbing the 'artists' is... Oakland! 20-minutes, or one BART stop away! That sounds fine to me. As SF gets bigger, let people overflow into Oakland. I don't see what's so bad about that.

The only people who are really concerned about this are the ones to insist that SF and Oakland are totally different cities. Come on guys, they've been the same economic region for 100+ years, it's time to admit that they're the same city.

Re: How the Internet Ruined San Francisco (1999)

#22

Post by pikachu_is_cool »

colin_mccabe wrote: post #20
pikachu_is_cool wrote: post #3

I grew up in the Silicon Valley. One of the riches places in the world. The tech hub. Engineers. Soccer moms. Workaholic dads. The sound of leafblowers 24/7. No parties, no night life. Work work work. Money money money. Get a 2400 on your SAT. Get straight A's and go to UC Berkeley, and if you don't go there you're a failure. Go to the gym every day at 7AM. Eat healthy organic fruits. Everything you could ever possib…

I live in Silicon Valley, and we have both parties and night life. It depends on who your friends are. I also knew a lot of people back in Cleveland who were living the workaholic life, trying to get into the best colleges, and so forth. So that they could leave Cleveland behind. It's a state of mind, not a place. I realize this may not be a popular point of view among San Franciscans, but I think the east bay and so…

Cupertino (which is what I was referring to) is also ridiculously expensive, too. The apartment that I moved out of 2 years ago now costs $4,000 a month.

Also, I'm not talking about the rich adult night life. I'm talking about stuff you can do while you're growing up there. All of the kids my age were obsessed with getting straight A's, hardly any of them went out. The ones who were able to either were always in SF/Santa Cruz or were ridiculously rich.

Edit: I think we may be talking about different parts of the Valley. San Jose, Santa Cruz, and SF are nice, but I'm referring to the heart. i.e. Cupertino, Mountain View, and Sunnyvale.

Re: How the Internet Ruined San Francisco (1999)

#23

Post by steele »

pikachu_is_cool wrote: post #14
steele wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything except for the last part sounds nice.

Then you can take my place.

You know that I can't. And you also know that what you've described is a series of opportunities presented as a burden.

Re: How the Internet Ruined San Francisco (1999)

#24

Post by erikpukinskis »

smoyer wrote: post #19

I don't want to sound callous but ... market forces shape and reshape cities all the time. When the facets of city-life in San Francisco that initially drew people fade away, people will flock somewhere else and the rents will stagnate or reverse. And if San Francisco is losing its allure as an artist's hub, perhaps other places (such as downtown Detroit) are compensating? I live in a reasonably affluent smaller city…

> I still haven't seen what I think is a viable solution

What about cooperative ownership? When an asset is communally owned, it reduces the temptation for people to destroy it for a payout.

Re: How the Internet Ruined San Francisco (1999)

#25

Post by pikachu_is_cool »

steele wrote: post #23
pikachu_is_cool wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then you can take my place.

You know that I can't. And you also know that what you've described is a series of opportunities presented as a burden.

When you're having this shit shoved down your throat for your entire upbringing come back and tell me it's an opportunity.

Re: How the Internet Ruined San Francisco (1999)

#26

Post by Naritai »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #24
smoyer wrote: post #19

I don't want to sound callous but ... market forces shape and reshape cities all the time. When the facets of city-life in San Francisco that initially drew people fade away, people will flock somewhere else and the rents will stagnate or reverse. And if San Francisco is losing its allure as an artist's hub, perhaps other places (such as downtown Detroit) are compensating? I live in a reasonably affluent smaller city…

> I still haven't seen what I think is a viable solution What about cooperative ownership? When an asset is communally owned, it reduces the temptation for people to destroy it for a payout.

My biggest concern about communal ownership (ignoring tragedy of the commons) is that such an arrangement is simply undesirable for most people. There is something fundamentally unappealing about buying into a communal arrangement, and I can see why - I can easily think of a few past roommates to whom I'm very glad I was not financially bound in a long-term arrangement.

For example, TICs are declining in numbers in SF, not increasing. If communal ownership were a viable option, we should see the number of TICs increasing.

Re: How the Internet Ruined San Francisco (1999)

#27

Post by Naritai »

pikachu_is_cool wrote: post #25
steele wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know that I can't. And you also know that what you've described is a series of opportunities presented as a burden.

When you're having this shit shoved down your throat for your entire upbringing come back and tell me it's an opportunity.

when you've lived a life where you've never had any such opportunity, come back and tell me it's a burden.

EDIT: I just realized this is a classic 'first-world problem', but extended to 'first-world-upper-class problem'.

Re: How the Internet Ruined San Francisco (1999)

#28

Post by erikpukinskis »

Naritai wrote: post #26
erikpukinskis wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I still haven't seen what I think is a viable solution What about cooperative ownership? When an asset is communally owned, it reduces the temptation for people to destroy it for a payout.

My biggest concern about communal ownership (ignoring tragedy of the commons) is that such an arrangement is simply undesirable for most people. There is something fundamentally unappealing about buying into a communal arrangement, and I can see why - I can easily think of a few past roommates to whom I'm very glad I was not financially bound in a long-term arrangement. For example, TICs are declining in numbers in S…

Yes, there are certainly a lot of unsolved problems in communal ownership. I'm optimistic that solutions are out there.

>If communal ownership were a viable option, we should see the number of TICs increasing.

I don't understand how that follows. All that indicates is that some particular operating structures (the specific TICs in place in SF) are not viable on one specific market (SF) in one particular moment in history.

I was just suggesting that in theory communal ownership could solve the problem. How to actually get that to work, in practice, is a problem that entrepreneurs have been working on for decades, and it will take many decades more.

Re: How the Internet Ruined San Francisco (1999)

#29

Post by brianchu »

pikachu_is_cool wrote: post #3

I grew up in the Silicon Valley. One of the riches places in the world. The tech hub. Engineers. Soccer moms. Workaholic dads. The sound of leafblowers 24/7. No parties, no night life. Work work work. Money money money. Get a 2400 on your SAT. Get straight A's and go to UC Berkeley, and if you don't go there you're a failure. Go to the gym every day at 7AM. Eat healthy organic fruits. Everything you could ever possib…

It's a matter of perspective. The grass is always greener on the other side, and I think it's unrealistic to pine for an idealistic childhood.

I was born and raised in Palo Alto and I go to UC Berkeley now. I spend a lot of time in SF. A lot of what you said relates to my childhood. But a lot of what happened was the result of my choices. I love technology and I love the culture here. One thing that helped me before going to college was taking a year off to work, which really helped me figure out what was important to focus on and what isn't important (not important = grades. important = meeting people). Now that I'm in college, I could easily choose to party all the time and slack off. But that's just not me. Plus, I've had fun at parties/kickbacks in SF before.

As a side note. I use "Silicon Valley" to refer to the SF Bay Area (SF + East Bay + geographic SV). To me, Silicon Valley is a term for the entire technology region, much like "LA" describes the metropolitan LA area, and "Wall Street" describes NY finance in general.

Re: How the Internet Ruined San Francisco (1999)

#30

Post by [deleted] »

Naritai wrote: post #27
pikachu_is_cool wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you're having this shit shoved down your throat for your entire upbringing come back and tell me it's an opportunity.

when you've lived a life where you've never had any such opportunity, come back and tell me it's a burden. EDIT: I just realized this is a classic 'first-world problem', but extended to 'first-world-upper-class problem'.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN