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

Diary: Google Invades

lrb.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–118 of 118 posts

Re: Diary: Google Invades

#111

Post by tomkarlo »

hoverkraft wrote: post #3

Interesting point about public transportation -- by creating a private bus system, tech companies are actively suppressing demand for better public transport between SF and the valley.

You're assuming that a large share of those riders would take public transport, but most of them would probably drive, since that's what the large majority of people in SF who don't have access to a corporate bus do.

The bus provides an appealing (relative to the Caltrain) option that's appealing to people who could also easily afford to drive. (They're more convenient than the train or driving, to boot, whereas taking the train is much less convenient.) In doing so, they take tens of thousands of cars off the road each morning.

Re: Diary: Google Invades

#112

Post by mturmon »

scarmig wrote: post #72
andrewcooke wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's very good writing, by an award winning writer, in one of the top lit magazines. but i don't expect people on google buses, or hn, to know that, even less recognise it. [edit: and... the entire post has been flagged off the front page (59 points, 2 hours ago, page 2). because anything critical is clearly irrelevant, as well as poorly written, and clearly not understanding what it's really like. la la la. what a p…

For the record, plenty of people at Google read magazines like LRB or NYRB. Significantly more than the general population, probably even the population of people with undergraduate or graduate degrees. Some people here being, charitably, more focused on the tech side of the brain than other parts doesn't change that, though it can give misleading impressions.

I don't disagree with you that highly-educated groups, like at Google, probably read LRB, NYRB, n+1, and other magazines with cultural influence at a much higher rate than the population at large, and more than non-techies might suspect.

But, there is certainly touchiness on hn when authors with, say, a "humanist" perspective critique the tech sphere.

There's a tendency to say these writers are not being sufficiently rational, that they are using incorrect terminology, and other things that seem like evasions on the part of much of the hn readership.

Another approach is to assume that the writer has a point, and to try to appreciate the piece for what insight it can provide. Or as a wise man said, "Try to be one of those on whom nothing is lost."

Re: Diary: Google Invades

#113

Post by DannyBee »

brown9-2 wrote: post #85
DannyBee wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I said elsewhere, most of this is known to employees of these companies, and privately mentioned, but not highly public. This is done because otherwise, the towns get yelled at. Heavily. There are lots of interest groups involved in this kind of thing.

It's hard to make an argument with private/secret evidence.

It's not secret, just not very well known. As I said, you can usually find it in mountain view committee meeting minutes (for Google), cupertino council minutes (for Apple), etc.

Re: Diary: Google Invades

#114

Post by csharpminor »

thedufer wrote: post #98
csharpminor wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was about to just make the same comment. I think the "tech boom" has done a lot for SF, but it's a great example of how wealth and investment is highly concentrated in just a few areas of the country. Ideally, startups would look at those costs, do the analysis, and make the decision to locate elsewhere in order to minimize risk. But SF (and NYC) have a kind of legendary status as being where successful tech compan…

> the sector that has the knowledge and employee base to be geographically independent are also the ones that pay the most for their location I agree that more tech companies should be okay with remote workers. But its not the trivial thing you make it out to be - it takes work, especially in larger teams. And unless you're going to put that work in and make it a part of your team's identity, you have to be where the…

Right, it's a self-reinforcing trend. Companies move to locations where talent exists, talented individuals seek those locations out.

But my point was that this makes it really difficult for startups (or any tech company) to make a calculated decision about whether or not location is worth the extra expense. I don't think it's surprising that tech companies are located together, but I think the community would do well to investigate whether the costs provide adequate returns in a majority of cases. (TWGS;IHRTS)[Take with a grain of salt; I haven't researched this shit]

Re: Diary: Google Invades

#115

Post by newman314 »

I've been looking at homes recently and it just depresses the hell out of me.

I'm not in my twenties anymore, don't work for the googles etc. although I have a relatively good tech job.

A semi decent house on the peninsula is coming in around 1 mil. And that's often for much less than 2000sq feet.

And this is for a house that has doubled in value since 1999. Afaik, salary increases are nowhere near that and certainly not mine.

Re: Diary: Google Invades

#116

Post by philsnow »

rayiner wrote: post #52
ahlatimer wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are in the process of building the Transbay Center [1] which would bring Caltrain closer to the heart of SOMA. Slated for completion in 2017. You can see the construction of it on google maps: http://goo.gl/maps/iMfZx [1]: http://transbaycenter.org/

The TransBay development looks awesome. Reminds me a lot of Ogilvie in Chicago (exiting into the base of a skyscraper with integrated retail). It looks like the future--I'm sure San Franciscans hate it.

If this is the future, the folks who made the MTR in hong Kong must have access to a time machine ;)

Re: Diary: Google Invades

#117

Post by newman314 »

newman314 wrote: post #115

I've been looking at homes recently and it just depresses the hell out of me. I'm not in my twenties anymore, don't work for the googles etc. although I have a relatively good tech job. A semi decent house on the peninsula is coming in around 1 mil. And that's often for much less than 2000sq feet. And this is for a house that has doubled in value since 1999. Afaik, salary increases are nowhere near that and certainly…

Looking around San Carlos, there are entire stretches of houses going for $1.5 to 2mil.

This are for houses that in my mind, are the idealization of the American Dream. 3-4 bedroom, nice yard, 2 car garage. Not the McMansions of lore.

Taking that same amount of money and going to say Texas, would likely yield a ridiculously large house.

But more importantly, I keep wondering, are there really that many people around me that make so much money to be able to afford this without blinking an eye or is it more just keeping up with the Joneses....

Re: Diary: Google Invades

#118

Post by tomkarlo »

angersock wrote: post #56
tomkarlo wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure it's right to call this "journalism." It's an individual opinion that doesn't seem to be supported by much actual investigation, or reporting. It's how she sees the world through her eyes and imagines things to be, based on her experience and anecdote, much of which is grossly inaccurate. Would she be happier if Google didn't offer buses, folks were forced to either drive individual cars or live outside…

Instead, the Bay Area benefits from rising real estate values, tax revenues and an international profile. I think that's sort of the central point of the article, though--as this gentrification and displacement of established community members continues, what exactly is "The Bay Area" that is benefiting? Is it the real estate holding companies (many of them likely international)? Is the current batch of fresh faces f…

"Real estate holding companies?"

The broad majority of SF housing is one or two family dwellings. (I'd guess as much as 90% of the city.) They're mostly occupied by owners, not rented, so the folks who benefit are the existing residents of the city who own their homes.

Post reply on HN