Realistically, X is better than its ever been; community notes have been a game-changer in terms of fact-checking. Higher quality and much more balanced.
Nor really. It used to work for all people with browser now it is only for logged-in.
Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay
301–310 of 1001 posts
Re: Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay
#302As a UK chap, can someone give me their opinion on if San Jose is a more pleasant place to live than San Fran these days?
San Jose is very much a suburbia-type city, very spread out, downtown is rather small and you need a car 90% of the time, whereas SF is much denser. I assume the drug use/homeless issues are less prevalent in San Jose, at least it was that way 10 yrs ago.
> suburbia-type city
Isn't this oxymoron? Isn't city the `urbia`?
Re: Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay
#303Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because in reality, as in statistically, SF is actually not that dangerous. People say this about any vaguely blue city, which is almost all of them. But they forget Urban areas are very dense. You're actually more likely, per capita, to die to gun violence in rural America. It's just very hard to see that because the coverage isn't there and the actual amount of deaths is lower.
Fascinating how suicides are creatively included in "gun violence."
There is a gun, and it's violent. And keep in mind suicide isn't always clear-cut.
What about a 13 year old boy who grabs the gun from the safe? This could have been prevented, and it's also suicide. This is a rather common scenario, too.
Re: Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay
#304Earlier quoted context omitted.
SF is a deeply challenging city, and you really appreciate this by traveling and visiting other cities. You are constantly on alert, in ways that simply you are not in other places despite the fact that there are “good and bad” parts of town everywhere else. Perhaps caused by the unpredictability in SF of often finding “bad” in “good” parts of town, with unpredictable drug addict behavior on top, which adds to the un…
These anecdotes aren’t unique to a city like SF though. I can find similar stories in my relatively small but dense suburb. The statistics just do not back up the claims that SF is uniquely dangerous or has worse problems than anywhere else of that size/density.
> These anecdotes aren’t unique to a city like SF though.
But they are, because this is city that has established a record $1B+/year budget to solve the problem, without setting up a rigorous process to be accountable on how that money is being spent, with corruption cases (and arrests) linked to the recipients of those public funds [1][2].
Quite unique, indeed.
Re: Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay
#305Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because in reality, as in statistically, SF is actually not that dangerous. People say this about any vaguely blue city, which is almost all of them. But they forget Urban areas are very dense. You're actually more likely, per capita, to die to gun violence in rural America. It's just very hard to see that because the coverage isn't there and the actual amount of deaths is lower.
Per capita is such a stupid way to measure shooting danger. What really matters is average proximity to shootings (which does measure danger, since proximity to the bullet could lead to you getting killed, or the shooter aiming in another close direction). Obviously, this is higher in dense areas, hence the higher perceived danger. Case in point, if you have a rural area of 1000 people and there are 10 shootings (1%…
Right, but I'm saying there's a disconnect between perception and reality. The reputation cities have is based on their perception and not necessarily reality.
You can only make some place so safe in a country like the US. It's trivial to obtain a firearm, so naturally gun violence will always be a problem for us.
To be fair, cities do also generally have MUCH more public services available. They have shelters, food banks, and free mental health facilities out the wazoo as compared to rural areas. But there's only so much you can do.
Re: Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay
#306Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because in reality, as in statistically, SF is actually not that dangerous. People say this about any vaguely blue city, which is almost all of them. But they forget Urban areas are very dense. You're actually more likely, per capita, to die to gun violence in rural America. It's just very hard to see that because the coverage isn't there and the actual amount of deaths is lower.
Per capita is such a stupid way to measure shooting danger. What really matters is average proximity to shootings (which does measure danger, since proximity to the bullet could lead to you getting killed, or the shooter aiming in another close direction). Obviously, this is higher in dense areas, hence the higher perceived danger. Case in point, if you have a rural area of 1000 people and there are 10 shootings (1%…
[deleted]
Re: Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay
#307Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fascinating how suicides are creatively included in "gun violence."
There is a gun, and it's violent. And keep in mind suicide isn't always clear-cut. What about a 13 year old boy who grabs the gun from the safe? This could have been prevented, and it's also suicide. This is a rather common scenario, too.
Here's what Black's Law Dictionary has to say:
*violence.* Unjust or unwarranted exercise of force, usually with accompaniment of vehemence, outrage, or fury. People v. McIlvain, 55 Cal.App.2d 322, 130 P.2d 131, 134. Physical force unlawfully exercised; abuse of force; that force which is employed against common right, against the laws, and against public liberty. Anderson-Berney Bldg. Co. v. Lowry, Tex.Civ.App., 143 S.W.2d 401, 403. The exertion of any physical force so as to injure, damage or abuse. See e.g. Assault.
Violence in labor disputes is not limited to physical contact or injury, but may include picketing conducted with misleading signs, false statements, publicity, and veiled threats by words and acts. Esco Operating Corporation v. Kaplan, 144 Misc. 646, 258 N.Y.S. 303.
[Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 1570]
---
There's a stark difference between randomly being killed by someone else (i.e.: during a stick-up robbery in the Tenderloin) and consciously choosing to end one's own life: intentional blurring of these lines is often an exercise in bad faith.
These conversations are typically held under the frame that "gun violence" is a valid reason to abridge a Constitutionally-enumerated right.
Suicide, accidental mishandling, etc. are "user error" - not remotely-valid reasons to amend the Constitution or to chip away at rights using legislation. (Confusingly, vehemently anti-gun folks often hold the most pro-euthanasia/doctor-assisted-suicide positions.)
"Likely to die" is a loaded phrase: why is one person of sound mind more "likely" to commit suicide in a rural area? (Is it that boring?)
Re: Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay
#308Earlier 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.
From what I could tell, the 'standard' for reasonable commute measures from the employee's home, not from the original location to the other. But the federal WARN info says 'reasonable' varies by locale, and didn't offer any specifics.
Moving the office is probably neutral or better for people on the Penisula. And may be neutral for parts of the East Bay. Depends on where exactly in San Jose the new office is too.
Also, I was surprised by how light traffic was when I drove from Mountain View to SF last October during what I was expecting to be the morning rush hour. I don't recall what the reverse direction looked like, though.
But my point was kind of to raise the likelyhood that this action was taken without regard for how it looks, and without regard for required notifications.
Re: Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay
#309Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know if you are serious but because of LLMs trained on our work basically every tech company is scrambling for ways to get rid of programmers. Just yesterday I commented in a thread here where someone said 80% of their work is LLMable "bullshit" (somehow that guy, like many, didn't connect it to headcount or likelihood of keeping own job...)
Even if it wasn't for LLMs, it feels like a long time since I did more than convert someone else's Figma (or Adobe XD, or Photoshop document) into code, and glue it to a pre-existing API. I'm sure real estate lawyers feel much the same about how rote their work is. People pay for that, and it's valuable, but it does feel like these tasks should've been automated away a decade ago, without LLMs.
Lawyers or real engineers can only push a button and still have secure jobs because they have licenses/certifications/boards and liabilities with consequences. There is no such thing in programming. (Even though our mistakes can and do also lead to real people dying)
> it feels like a long time since I did more than convert someone else's Figma (or Adobe XD, or Photoshop document) into code, and glue it to a pre-existing API
That looks like webdev, that's like a minuscule part of all programming in question.
> automated away a decade ago, without LLMs.
I think LLMs is the worst part of it because literally what programmers do is used against them. It's like taxi drivers used to train self driving cabs to automate themselves out of jobs, except imagine self driving cars actually worked and there are no unions or protective gov regulation and taxi drivers all cheer for this because each thinks the whole firing and pay reduction is only for someone else not themselves:)
Re: Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay
#310Did San Jose agree to let them use their incredibly obnoxious blinking X logo eyesore? ‘SHUT IT OFF!!’ Disruptive new ‘X’ logo removed in San Francisco: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/07/31/twitter... >Construction crews dismantled the giant, blinking ‘X’ logo after 24 complaints were logged with the city San Jose is much more permissive than San Francisco when it comes to shitty public art: San Jose’…
The new HQ should have a giant neon poo emoji for a sign.
Made out of real poo!