Live data from Hacker News

Should more of us be moving to live near friends?

architecturaldigest.com

341–350 of 517 posts

Re: Should more of us be moving to live near friends?

#341
post #71

Coming from a Latin American the idea of re-starting your life across the country for college and then again for work (multiple times sometimes) while away from family and friends is very foreign. A lot of the conversation around modern American youth feeling isolated, lacking socialization and not building strong relationships seems that stem from this drive. Another thing that’s really weird and related is another…

>Another thing that’s really weird and related is another recurring theme in the American ethos: the cultural shame that comes with living “at home” or staying in the same small town for your whole life. Somehow they made it so living close to your family and friends for your 20s-30s and maybe forever means you’re a “loser”.

The older I get, the more I regret moving away from my family and friends in New Jersey. I'm only 3 hours away so still see them about once a month, but I'm very envious of my friends that stayed in our home town and get to see each other every weekend and their children get to spend daily time with their grandparents.

Whenever we consider moving back though, housing prices are always one of the biggest deterrents.

Re: Should more of us be moving to live near friends?

#342
post #60
post #46

I go back and forth on this. I still keep in touch with a bunch of high school and college friends. For better or worse those guys know "the real me" and the history and relationships are impossible to replace. They all still live close together but I live far away - I only see them once or twice a year, if that (less right now because we're all in the "very young kids" stage). I miss them. On the other hand, when I…

I don’t know if it’ll help any, but I maintain a solid handful of group chats with friends of mine from years long past. I don’t have a social media pretense at all, and the “intimate” nature of a “raw” group chat has helped me, personally, keep in touch with people I otherwise wouldn’t have.

likewise. We have a signal group chat that we've slowly been adding new friends to. It's a fantastic way to stay in touch

Re: Should more of us be moving to live near friends?

#343
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm, tangentially related, but how would you say SF changed? Where would you get this feeling of SF back then nowadays? Thought about giving SF a visit in summer as an aspiring software engineer & entrepreneur but curious to what you think about it.

Hard to say, and it's highly subjective. It just feels like Silicon Valley is no longer about building cool things and making the world better through technology. It's become about exploitation and extraction, instead of building. It's about capturing and controlling users rather than serving them. It's about "crushing it in the market, bro." It's grindset, hustle culture, performative work. It's about phony tech cho…

[dead]

Re: Should more of us be moving to live near friends?

#344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's a common trope on here to lament on how the Anglo cultures don't value family ties strongly enough. I'd argue not overly valuing family ties has been a big competitive advantage of the Anglo cultures for centuries, eg. moving for opportunity (improved social mobility), ability to connect with outsiders, couple pairing across cultural/geographical boundaries, prerequisite to a high trust society, etc. That line…

"anglo cultures" already had quite a lead before WW2, hard to miss that the previous superpower was the British Empire. The outcome of WW2 elevated America, there's no relationship there to broader anglo culture. Quite a stretch to jump to "everyone might be miserable". Immigration from Latin American and other non-anglo countries is on a scale where it shapes American and British domestic politics, difficult to conc…

[deleted]

Re: Should more of us be moving to live near friends?

#345
post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is going on a tangent, but I would like to point out to you that Atheism is itself a religion: It's a belief in no god(s), a belief in refuting god(s). I'm Japanese, we (Japan) consider ourselves Non-Religious when we choose to celebrate newborn life at Shinto Shrines, weddings at Christian Churches, and funerals and graves at Buddhist Temples with no dogmatic attachment to any of them as an institution as we go…

Japanese are massively superstitious (as are most peoples). That's not quite the same as religion but it's somewhere in the same side of the spectrum.

I would question this thesis.

First, “religion” is not an especially good word in practice, as what people call “religion” is highly varied, enough so that the set of assertions that hold for all of them is exceedingly small and increasingly banal such that it ultimately becomes synonymous with worldview. The vague feeling of what religion is in most people’s minds is highly informed by caricature and parochial experience that is then overgeneralized.

But in the specific case of Catholicism, superstition is, in fact, recognized as sinful precisely because it is irrational (and thus opposed to human nature and the human good) and often rooted in a desire to control what is not in scope for human control or ought not be within the scope of the desire to control. Think “spells” that are meant to control others or palm reading meant to tell you your future or rituals that are supposed to alter your luck like throwing salt over your shoulder or believing that black cats bring bad luck. All these are regarded as irrational in the sense that they have no rational justification, no causal efficacy, or trade in bogus notions, but also conspicuously evil when they entail the desire to objectify and manipulate other people. (These, in turn, are said to predispose their practitioners to malicious influence, as ill will and irrationality are weaknesses that predispose a person to that.) Faith, properly understood, is not the nonsense the popular culture or Hallmark movies tell us it is (i.e., wishful thinking), only either a rationally justified trust or reason supplemented by some kind of divine act. The divinity of Jesus is an article of faith, but the existence of God is not, as it can be know by unaided reason. In any case, the point here is that genuine faith is not a matter of superstition, even if in practice superstitious people often live out a superficial ersatz of faith.

Now, if there is anything that is magic-adjacent in terms of intent and the desire for control, it is the Baconian view of science, not something like Catholicism. Modern science grows out of the Catholic tradition as a sustained enterprise in the sense that Catholicism takes the nature of man to be essentially “rational animal”, and because God (vis—a-vis the Second Person of the Trinity) is seen as essentially Rationality as such (Logos) and the world the fundamentally and fully intelligible creation ex nihilo of God. Baconian science, however, places less emphasis on knowing and greater emphasis on power.

Re: Should more of us be moving to live near friends?

#346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> More like I need to be rich to move to where my friends are Like most folks, we live where we can. Being able to pick a spot on a map has never been a possibility. It's been tighter than that tho. In 2021 we beat loooong odds to find any housing and insane odds to score a decent place that fit all of us. People with money in the bank were going homeless.

[dead]

> what were the long odds please do tell

These were the calculable factors for this area, in mid 2021.

Each rental listing had ~400 unique applicants per day. For total number of rentals, a generous est is ~100 new listings per month in the 3 counties we searched. In our 4 mo of searching (of a 6mo window) I found 2 good fits but 1 was at the extreme end of affordability.

For a decade of complex reasons (inc. extreme poverty, responsible spending and unforeseen changes in the rental market) I had a ~0 credit rating. That rules out most/all software managed rentals - over 95% from what I can glean.

The ad for the rental we scored inc a crayon layout on lined paper. It was posted for 2 hrs and received >50 applicants. We scored it by offering 6mos up front plus a 2x sec dep. Having that much money on hand followed another set of timely and unlikely circumstances.

The long odds, they are whatever all the above maths out to.

Re: Should more of us be moving to live near friends?

#347
post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In practice though, unless you're in the Richard Dawkins camp, it's a distinction without really a difference.

The Richard Dawkins camp is pretty large (or maybe just vocal?) on the internet though and so the difference is important.

I vote vocal.

Re: Should more of us be moving to live near friends?

#348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's a common trope on here to lament on how the Anglo cultures don't value family ties strongly enough. I'd argue not overly valuing family ties has been a big competitive advantage of the Anglo cultures for centuries, eg. moving for opportunity (improved social mobility), ability to connect with outsiders, couple pairing across cultural/geographical boundaries, prerequisite to a high trust society, etc. That line…

"anglo cultures" already had quite a lead before WW2, hard to miss that the previous superpower was the British Empire. The outcome of WW2 elevated America, there's no relationship there to broader anglo culture. Quite a stretch to jump to "everyone might be miserable". Immigration from Latin American and other non-anglo countries is on a scale where it shapes American and British domestic politics, difficult to conc…

> "anglo cultures" already had quite a lead before WW2, hard to miss that the previous superpower was the British Empire.

I think you're trying too hard to muddy the waters by creating a definition for "anglo" that does not match reality or any use of the term.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Americans

Even within "European Americans", nearly half has an ethnic origin that is classified as German, not English.

Another important aspect is immigration and naturalization. The bulk of high-skilled R&D specialists who turned the US into the technological powerhouse that it is aren't exactly Mayflower descendants. It's immigrants and first- and second-generation. So it's very hard to argue about "Anglo" thins with the extreme reliance on immigration and descendent of immigrants to play the roles that made all this progress possible.

Re: Should more of us be moving to live near friends?

#349
post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first isn't atheism, it is agnostic - no religion and not looking for one, but open to it if you can convince them your religion is right (which you can't because they are not interested in the topic)

Atheism is defined as the absence of belief which is essentially what OP said. The fact that we are open to changing our mind if theoretically presented with strong evidence does not make us agnostic. You’d probably also accept that sun is made of cheese if presented strong enough evidence but don’t call yourself agnostic about the topic given your current knowledge.

Atheism is the position that God does not exist. An atheist is someone who therefore says “I believe that there is no God.”

It is not a mere lack of belief, as agnostics can be said to lack belief in God as well. People who are simply ignorant of God also lack a proper belief in God, but this is not atheism, only ignorance. They simply have not come to terms with the subject and therefore have no position on the matter. An atheist does, however unsophisticated it may be.

This view that atheism is simply a lack of belief in God is common among the intellectually challenged New Atheist crowd and would have been ridiculous to the much more intellectually substantive atheists of old, like Neitzsche (who, btw, while an atheist, found it a horrifying thing; the other classic atheists could be described as world-weary rather than insipid, parochial, middle class triumphant).

Re: Should more of us be moving to live near friends?

#350
post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm going in a tangent too here :-) . One can say that atheism (with lower case) is a lack of religion. And then there is the meaning you suggest: Atheism as a belief in refuting god. That one is not a proper religion, but more like an ideology. Or maybe it is a religion in the sense that it can be used as a moral cornerstone. More than playing with words, not believing in god may be one of three things: irrelevant,…

I think the parallel many draw is that atheism is taking a position of certainty on the question of a God. And that certainty is based largely on personal belief as any evidence for such a question will inherently be weak. To me agnosticism would be more the absence of religion, because the absence of religion doesn't imply any particular opinion on the existence or not of a God. One can believe there might be a God…

The idea that someone can be without “religion” is very odd. The word “religion” is generally worthless as used, as for most people, this is merely some vague sense of what was called “religion” in their particular experience. But a coherent common characteristic, as it were, is that it is a worldview with a highest good. Everyone has some kind of worldview and some notion of a hierarchy of goods, usually something absorbed from their environment.

So it is pointless to speak of whether you are “religious”. It makes more sense to ask how you are religious. It is far more interesting to discuss the merits of your religion or other religions than to go around pretending you don’t have one.

Post reply on HN