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

This Is Silicon Valley

onezero.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 227 posts

Re: This Is Silicon Valley

#191

Post by romwell »

bduerst wrote: post #137
romwell wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>We should be thankful, not weirdly bragging about how hard our childhoods were. The kids that ended their lives aren't bragging or complaining anymore. This author speaks on their behalf. It is not a life-defining tragedy until it becomes a life-ending one. And saying "you should be happy" doesn't help a bit to those who are getting tired of living. Some people have it better, some have it worse. The kids who killed…

You've missed what they're saying in their comment. Mental health is a serious issue, but the author isn't bringing up these suicides to talk about how she's going to help prevent them, or even bring attention to suicide in high schools - she's using it in a social media-esque post about why she's out. She's done. Goodbye Silicon Valley, you're not the utopia I expected right out of college with my cushy job and free…

I didn't take the original article the way you described it, and I don't think there's anything wrong with the "I'm done" attitude. Nobody is obligated to fight all the battles all the time to begin with, and beyond that, speaking out and voting with one's feet is an effective way to cause change.

To gauge effectiveness, think this way: what would happen if everyone in her position did the same thing? Most certainly the area would experience a drastic change.

You know what's not effective? Shaming people into silence by calling them narcissistic. Sure, you can write off her experience as whining - and how's that going to help anyone?

The kids who committed suicide were going through what the author was going through, more or less, and committed suicide for the same reasons the author does not feel happy in the Bay Area. I don't know what else to say except that what she says matters. Listen to it.

In any case, my main take-away from the post was this: the Bay Area is not a healthy environment even for the well-off kids to grow up in, and to live in. The damage of the competitive rat-race is not offset by the prize of getting a FAANG job even for those who get there.

In the end, people like her make are representative of what drives the culture here, and this culture sucks. And again: act to change, understand to act, empathize to understand. This starts with you.

Re: This Is Silicon Valley

#192

Post by bduerst »

romwell wrote: post #191
bduerst wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've missed what they're saying in their comment. Mental health is a serious issue, but the author isn't bringing up these suicides to talk about how she's going to help prevent them, or even bring attention to suicide in high schools - she's using it in a social media-esque post about why she's out. She's done. Goodbye Silicon Valley, you're not the utopia I expected right out of college with my cushy job and free…

I didn't take the original article the way you described it, and I don't think there's anything wrong with the "I'm done" attitude. Nobody is obligated to fight all the battles all the time to begin with, and beyond that, speaking out and voting with one's feet is an effective way to cause change. To gauge effectiveness, think this way: what would happen if everyone in her position did the same thing? Most certainly…

You accused GP of taking mental health issues too lightly. I reiterated their point of how the tone of this article rubs people the wrong way.

I'm not shaming anyone, just as the GP here isn't taking mental health issues lightly either. Again, nobody is saying these issues are to be taken lightly, or that anyone is obligated to solve them (that's part of the false trichotomy I talked about). Please stop accusing people and projecting these straw men.

Re: This Is Silicon Valley

#193

Post by jjulius »

crushcrashcrush wrote: post #185
jjulius wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That being said, states like Colorado and California are some of the few areas with solid protections for LGBTQ people. For sure. That, and similar aspects, are what we really enjoy about living here.

Full admission - my hetero/cisgendered worldview made me ignore this side of reasoning for living here. But doesn’t NYC, Seattle, Portland, LA, Miami offer similar protections? Great point none the less!

They do! Though one could argue that Seattle is (and has been) moving in the direction of SF/SV in terms of cultural homogeneity, while my brother-in-law has been living in PDX for a while now and says that he loves it but complains about the strong level of "group-think". I can't speak to NYC or Miami as I've only visited twice and once, respectively, though I love how diverse the culture of NYC is.

Edit: That's not to say that they're anywhere near as homogeneous as SF/SV have become, though. I just think it's worth mentioning as it relates to the broader topic.

Re: This Is Silicon Valley

#194

Post by [deleted] »

eeeeeeeeeeeee wrote: post #170
jjulius wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I couldn't agree more. The Bay Area was always one of the only places my wife and I could mutually agree on whenever we'd chat about places we'd like to move to. I grew up in Seattle and have family scattered throughout SF and the East Bay, and was fortunate enough to have made multiple trips per year to the area since I was a kid. Those trips fostered a love for the region, for SF as a city, and the people here. The…

I have a somewhat similar perspective, having moved to Colorado about four years ago. There are clearly a lot of transplants here, but if you go for a walk around Denver, it's A LOT of affluent white people. Go to Boulder and it's even more pronounced (similar to a miniature Silicon Valley). I'm very conflicted because there is a lot to like about Colorado, but I sometimes wish I moved to an area that was not so whit…

[deleted]

Re: This Is Silicon Valley

#195

Post by TheHwangover »

sebastos wrote: post #172
crushcrashcrush wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While it may not live up to your editorial standards, it's clearly resonating with this audience. Maybe attack the ideas and not the structure / style of the piece? It has nothing to do with the author "finding meaning." It's critiquing an overpriced, socially bankrupt culture and area, and the toll that can take on mental health and happiness.

I mean, I could do that, but that's kind of missing the point. In fact, I don't particularly disagree with the ideas. I think it would be pretty hard to find people who do! That's what makes the piece so banal - it's saying things that everyone will agree with in a very fluffy, very unexamined way. >It's critiquing an overpriced, socially bankrupt culture and area, and the toll that can take on mental health and happ…

Does that make what the author is trying to convey any more right/wrong? Doesn't matter if you have experience/insight through years of trial or turmoil. If you get to an enlightened state faster, more power to you. Don't discredit the author for missing whatever steps you had in mind

Re: This Is Silicon Valley

#196

Post by crushcrashcrush »

CompanionCuuube wrote: post #183
crushcrashcrush wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. The problem isn't the writer of this piece, it's the person you're replying to. pot/kettle/black/etc

It's mind boggling that a criticism of the narrowness of a monoculture is being called superficial.

Welcome to HN!

Re: This Is Silicon Valley

#197

Post by crushcrashcrush »

rak00n wrote: post #189
crushcrashcrush wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's simple. We need more fucking housing. Period. End of story. We need condo towers. We need townhomes. We need mid-rises. And secondly, we need free and low cost mental health services. That's it. Problem solved. The problem is we're 20 years behind.

Nope, your just indentfied the problem that needs to be solved. You haven't "solved" the problem, which is massively more complex.

You must be really fun at cocktail parties.

Re: This Is Silicon Valley

#198

Post by zackmorris »

It's funny, living in Boise (Idaho), I have the opposite view of California and especially Silicon Valley than almost everyone I've met who lived there.

They tend to complain about fakeness, or the high cost of living, or too much government.

But to me, San Francisco has the best aura of any place I've ever been, other than possibly Costa Rica. It's like some kind of Mecca.

It seems like part of the reason San Francisco is so hyper-competitive is that everyone wants to live there. Which is understandable, because if it was any cheaper, everyone WOULD live there. An acre of land where I live can be as cheap as $10,000. The catch is that it's desert so you have to drill your own well, which may not be available. Also the social scene is essentially nonexistent, so you will likely be single for months, possibly years. And you'll be surrounded by half a million people who are more influenced by religion, football and having a large family than anything else.

I'm disappointed that the big tech companies don't get (and likely will never get) issues like wealth inequality and how they directly diminish the quality of life of all people who are not part of the illuminati. But I think conflating that central problem with the symptoms of it like homelessness, poor mental health and high taxes on low income earners is a fallacy.

Re: This Is Silicon Valley

#199

Post by matchbok »

CompanionCuuube wrote: post #183
crushcrashcrush wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. The problem isn't the writer of this piece, it's the person you're replying to. pot/kettle/black/etc

It's mind boggling that a criticism of the narrowness of a monoculture is being called superficial.

But, it's not monoculture. At all. You are making a judgement call with that. An extremely wrong one at that.

Re: This Is Silicon Valley

#200

Post by ericd »

throwaway-1283 wrote: post #160
ericd wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you lived in NYC? I don’t get this sense at all, as long as I stay away from the touristy parts of Manhattan.

Which parts of Manhattan aren't touristy? I lived there for a little over a year...agree that Manhattan is not necessarily that inspiring. I could never figure out what to do on the weekends. It felt like I was always stepping outside into a financial district and all anyone did was go to mediocre & expensive brunches.

Most parts that aren't near Times Square, IMO, aren't very touristy. Did you live in the financial district?

Do you enjoy nightlife? If not, you may not enjoy the city as much.

But there are frequent live music shows, good bars of all types, great late night food options (food trucks, pizza spots, Japanese izakayas), beautiful parks (I liked Prospect Park especially, but Central is gorgeous too). And if you're a single heterosexual guy in your 20s, the dating scene is pretty incredible. It seemed at least decent for other orientations too.

But yeah, there are overpriced brunches too. I tended not to do that as much because I'm not really a fan either.

Post reply on HN