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

181–190 of 267 posts

Re: San Francisco

#181

Post by osdiab »

jusben1369 wrote: post #143
lobotryas wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. Person…

SF people have to stop quoting the weather. The summer's are miserable with fog. It's as annoying as snow or sleet.

Really, if you want good weather in the bay area live in the valley. It's close enough and the weather is waaaay better.

Re: San Francisco

#182

Post by potatolicious »

hack_edu wrote: post #177
potatolicious wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your math is reasonably fair, IMO. That being said, the type of work being done in DC and SF is vastly different. I attended an iOS conference in DC a few months ago (I'm based out of NYC) and was shocked at how few "tech company" people were present. Nearly everyone was working for a government agency, a government contractor, or freelancing with a primarily government client-base. Personally I don't think I can do…

Whoa-whoa-whoa hold up. The spiraling cost of rent 'threatens the well-being of our industry?' I say this as an engineer who's worked in the local industry during both booms and as a native-born "local." Sure, perhaps but only just like it does for every other industry besides fancy restaurants and cafes. Rent is too damn high and no one wants to pay it, and we seem to be the only ones who can. But lets get some pers…

I disagree. The rising cost of living will have nothing but detrimental impact on startups. When $1m used to buy a year of runway, now it's $2m, and you're not really getting any more for your money, you're just making sure your engineers have a decent roof over their heads.

Your theory is sound except for one little problem: the Bay Area's transportation system is fucked. FUCKED. Completely, utterly, irredeemably fucked. BART is a joke, MUNI is like a fevered bad dream, Caltrain woefully inadequate.

So yeah, SOMA used to be urban blight, now it's urban blight with a bit of startups mixed in (seriously, go hang out at 6th/Mission for a bit). Rent (both residential and commercial) in SF is exploding, but there no more periphery, because nobody can reasonably get to said periphery.

Oakland has been trying to steal some of SF's thunder for years, offering themselves as the more affordable alternative. This will never happen at scale, because of how utterly screwed transportation is.

SF is out of space, and there's very little room for it to expand into, because nobody is willing to redevelop land, the the complete fuckery of a transportation network you have prevents effective expansion into anywhere that will let you develop.

At some point the cost of living and operating needs to square with reality. At some point a startup board member is going to say "Holy fuck, you pay HOW MUCH for your office?"

Re: San Francisco

#183

Post by subsystem »

hack_edu wrote: post #177
potatolicious wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your math is reasonably fair, IMO. That being said, the type of work being done in DC and SF is vastly different. I attended an iOS conference in DC a few months ago (I'm based out of NYC) and was shocked at how few "tech company" people were present. Nearly everyone was working for a government agency, a government contractor, or freelancing with a primarily government client-base. Personally I don't think I can do…

Whoa-whoa-whoa hold up. The spiraling cost of rent 'threatens the well-being of our industry?' I say this as an engineer who's worked in the local industry during both booms and as a native-born "local." Sure, perhaps but only just like it does for every other industry besides fancy restaurants and cafes. Rent is too damn high and no one wants to pay it, and we seem to be the only ones who can. But lets get some pers…

The argument I've heard is that it's the "soul" of the industry that's being threatened, rather than the industry itself, and the fear is that SF will basically end up being "software hollywood".

Re: San Francisco

#184

Post by jrockway »

neilk wrote: post #31
charliepark wrote: post #3

Is it a common experience that, as a single person in SF, you'd make $100K and end the year without any money saved? I'm not asking with any judgment or critique implied. I'm genuinely curious if that's normal in SF.

It is very common. But it's also the lifestyle that forces this. I was continually perplexed at how all of my colleagues seemed to be able to afford to go to all these conferences (not always on company dime), buy the most expensive coffee, upgrade their bleeding-edge laptop the moment Apple puts out a new one, and so on. I figured out later that they just weren't saving or investing any money, and often were even ac…

You're forgetting how much money people outside of San Francisco spend on their car. That makes expensive coffee, eating out, and computer upgrades look like pocket change.

Re: San Francisco

#185

Post by hack_edu »

subsystem wrote: post #183
hack_edu wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whoa-whoa-whoa hold up. The spiraling cost of rent 'threatens the well-being of our industry?' I say this as an engineer who's worked in the local industry during both booms and as a native-born "local." Sure, perhaps but only just like it does for every other industry besides fancy restaurants and cafes. Rent is too damn high and no one wants to pay it, and we seem to be the only ones who can. But lets get some pers…

The argument I've heard is that it's the "soul" of the industry that's being threatened, rather than the industry itself, and the fear is that SF will basically end up being "software hollywood".

Its not already?

Re: San Francisco

#186

Post by [deleted] »

potatolicious wrote: post #182
hack_edu wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whoa-whoa-whoa hold up. The spiraling cost of rent 'threatens the well-being of our industry?' I say this as an engineer who's worked in the local industry during both booms and as a native-born "local." Sure, perhaps but only just like it does for every other industry besides fancy restaurants and cafes. Rent is too damn high and no one wants to pay it, and we seem to be the only ones who can. But lets get some pers…

I disagree. The rising cost of living will have nothing but detrimental impact on startups. When $1m used to buy a year of runway, now it's $2m, and you're not really getting any more for your money, you're just making sure your engineers have a decent roof over their heads. Your theory is sound except for one little problem: the Bay Area's transportation system is fucked. FUCKED . Completely, utterly, irredeemably f…

[deleted]

Re: San Francisco

#187

Post by cellis »

Throwadev wrote: post #90
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.

It's so bad, you could easily join the OPD or SFPD (as a presumably fit young male) and be making more than an avg. engineer in a year or two (overtime incl.)

Re: San Francisco

#188

Post by michaelochurch »

hack_edu wrote: post #177
potatolicious wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your math is reasonably fair, IMO. That being said, the type of work being done in DC and SF is vastly different. I attended an iOS conference in DC a few months ago (I'm based out of NYC) and was shocked at how few "tech company" people were present. Nearly everyone was working for a government agency, a government contractor, or freelancing with a primarily government client-base. Personally I don't think I can do…

Whoa-whoa-whoa hold up. The spiraling cost of rent 'threatens the well-being of our industry?' I say this as an engineer who's worked in the local industry during both booms and as a native-born "local." Sure, perhaps but only just like it does for every other industry besides fancy restaurants and cafes. Rent is too damn high and no one wants to pay it, and we seem to be the only ones who can. But lets get some pers…

You don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

You think you're winning but you're treading water at best. On the MacLeod pyramid, you're hard-core Clueless. Put the Kool-Aid down!

I'm willing to posit that the relative high rent prices has give our industry to greatest boost of all in town.

What? That's money being wasted, not progress.

Silicon Valley was built when the land was cheap. It's now expensive and still somewhat strong, but that's an artifact of former greatness. Even if people move quickly, the patterns that attract and repel talent are slower to move (decades) and the chickens haven't come home to roost yet. Trust me: the land price problem is very bad for San Francisco's future.

This city is still the Gold Rush, always has been.

You don't have to have landlords making you poor to want to be rich.

This city is fueled by alcohol and general hedonism, which is fun!

Dude, San Francisco hedonism's got nothing on New York or L.A. or Miami, and none of those cities are regarded as tech hubs.

Just realize that we are the kings of this age of this city, and we are the last ones who would be at threat

You realize that 25-year-old VCs with no discernible merit (but the family connections that got them there) are making more than you will at age 50, and that those VP/NTWTFKs (Non-Technical Who The Fuck Knows) are getting 0.75% equity slices to your 0.03%, right?

You can't buy a house because of the real kings of that place and age: the VCs and those horrible executive implants that the VCs bring into your company (i.e. the VCs' underachieving friends who get positions in what you worked your ass off to build).

Re: San Francisco

#189

Post by tsotha »

justanother wrote: post #129
lobotryas wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. Person…

To add something to this discussion: On my South Florida tropical island, rent is 1500-1900 per month, depending on whether you live on a canal, or waterfront (nevermind living on dry land, which is much, much more reasonable). For most of a decade, I've telecommuted and received, well, let's round it down to the San Francisco 119K per year, and yes that's W2, and paid 22.8K/year a month for rent. Snow? Ice? haven't…

You read San Francisco is the center of the universe because there really is a network effect for software development. Companies looking for a bigger pool of talent to draw from relocate to the area, post jobs, and bring in yet more developers. On your South Florida island can you find someone with ten years of Cobol or five years programming 12F675s? If I started a company there, how many people could I hire that have solid experience in Scala? Not "I played around with it after work" experience, but real experience?

Re: San Francisco

#190

Post by jmspring »

jusben1369 wrote: post #143
lobotryas wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. Person…

SF people have to stop quoting the weather. The summer's are miserable with fog. It's as annoying as snow or sleet.

Hop in a car or on BART on the weekend, go 15-20min east and you can hike in the sun or wander around Berkeley/Oakland in warm weather. That said, March to April/early May and Sept-Nov are generally quite glorious.

Fog is a nice to have, you can always travel a short bit to avoid it.

Post reply on HN