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

Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay

sfstandard.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 1001 posts

Re: Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay

#251

Post by fosk »

analyst74 wrote: post #193
gtirloni wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> San Francisco has an odd tolerance for the tent communities When I visited SF for the first time in 2019, it felt really weird that such a rich place would have so many people living in tents in public spaces. Being naive, I saw dozens of tents in Sue Bierman Park and thought they were having an event or something. Then it dawned on me what I was seeing and it never made sense because certainly it doesn't take a lo…

I think it's mainly corruption. A significant amount of budget (hundreds of millions) is allocated to "deal" with homelessness in SF, so efforts to actually solve the problem are going to face significant challenges from existing beneficiaries.

The so called "homeless industrial complex" [1].

1 - https://www.nationalreview.com/the-weekend-jolt/californias-...

Re: Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay

#253

Post by z7 »

MrBuddyCasino wrote: post #170
iLoveOncall wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

San Jose and Palo Alto are both 30 minutes from San Francisco and in California...

You‘re right of course, I confused it with the move to Texas.

I wonder why the author omitted Musk's stated motive for the move. Wouldn't that be of interest to the reader? Like, why do this? I also notice your explanation has been censored.

Re: Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay

#254

Post by viraptor »

animuchan wrote: post #137
BugsJustFindMe wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> bans conservatives for "wrong think" Which "wrong think" specifically got people banned? Because the vast majority of conservatives on the platform did not get banned, so I'm left wondering which exact people banned for what exact reasons you're thinking of. Trump was removed after the Jan 6 assault on the capital for provoking that violence and repeatedly lying to his followers about the election, which, weirdly,…

I remember someone getting banned for a tweet saying "Men are different from women". Not even a conservative person, and a very mild take at that. See e.g. https://www.nationalreview.com/news/journalist-sues-twitter-... Getting banned for wrongthink on the old Twitter was a rite of passage, almost every content creator I follow (mostly gaming youtubers, nothing spicy or even controversial) got banned at least once.

What you quoted here and the article you linked are extremely different things. The article states "referring to a transgender individual by their biological sex and opining that “women aren’t men.”". You may not agree with that decision, but I hope you can understand that difference.

Re: Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay

#255

Post by deeth_starr_v »

jorts wrote: post #162
toast0 wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know what the established criteria are for 'reasonable commuting distance' in the SF Bay area, but seems like a big forced transfer like this might need a WARN act notice, which is going to get the company in the news for layoffs. And probably in the news for not providing the notice in a timely fashion, too. This would be a bad look for a company that cared about how it looks.

SF to San Jose would be a horrible commute via car, which not everyone has.

Not to bad via 280

Re: Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay

#256

Post by TechnicolorByte »

nomdep wrote: post #250
jorts wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SF to San Jose would be a horrible commute via car, which not everyone has.

Because they are paying SF rents? If they moved to San Jose wouldn’t they solve two problems at the same time?

If you enjoy being bored to death, perhaps.

Somehow I think the group of people who choose to live in SF have particular interests and desired amenities that make high rent worth it. E.g., walkable and lively neighborhoods, access to parks, events, etc.

Re: Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay

#258

Post by zo1 »

MOARDONGZPLZ wrote: post #176
zo1 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if those "Terms of Service" heavily aligns with left-wing ideology? Do we then finally concede that Twitter did, in fact, target or disproportionately affect non-left-wing users? Is our next point of discussion about whether we can allow such a huge societal discussion/debate tool to be aligned with a pre-defined set of principles that 50% of people don't agree with? Or rather, on a set of principles that we can'…

But even if, as you argue, calling for violence against people is part of right wing ideology or culture, it still seems reasonable to prohibit that. We do have to draw a line somewhere even against things that may be ingrained in a particular culture and which may have a disproportionate effect on that culture. But we should examine these choices in a principled way. Still, prohibiting calls for violence doesn’t see…

I will not use calls for violence as an example for this argument I'm making. I specifically left it vague so we could all apply our own minds on it.

But if i had to pick one it would be the Trans issue. Misgendering and having some rather "blunt" debates on this topic meant the platforms usually sided with the trans or left-wing party.

As for calls of violence: there are many examples where anti-white and anti-right calls for violence and extermination go unpunished and swept under the rug to be memory holed. Let's start by making this a bad thing across the board.

Re: Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay

#259

Post by dbbk »

jsheard wrote: post #116
TheAdamist wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thats generally the point with sudden disruptive moves - high attrition. Reduce the headcount without having to be in the news for layoffs.

They've already cut about 80% of their workforce since Elon took over, I'm not sure how much more attrition they can take. Sure the site still mostly works in the technical sense, but the way it works now has led to a significant decline in revenue and active users.

> Sure the site still mostly works in the technical sense

They just auto-banned everyone who downloaded their new Mac app so... no

Re: Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay

#260

Post by daghamm »

bcx wrote: post #130

It’s been a while since we had sf offices, but back when we did sf had a pretty aggressive additional payroll tax and gross receipts taxes. I’d imagine this is likely a factor in the decision. I know for a while they were waiving some of these taxes for companies who set up offices in certain parts of the city. E.g. zendesk got a big tax break for its market street location near the tenderloin. As for commutes, I’d b…

"I’ve never worked for musk or his managers — but I’d assume that if folks are high output he would not care how often they were in the office"

I have and believe me it's kind of random and dependent on the mood.

The problem is that even if you are a 100x engineer the guy in the bad mood today may not know or care who you are.

Post reply on HN