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

Downtown SF has 18.4M square feet of empty office space. We mapped every vacancy

sfchronicle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 388 posts

Re: Downtown SF has 18.4M square feet of empty office space. We mapped every vacancy

#371

Post by theironhammer »

zbrozek wrote: post #252
dumbotron wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Some of their stats resemble third world countries. Have you walked through the TL? Comparing California and Texas can be interesting because the states are both dominated by a single party, so you see how both ideologies can go wrong. With Texas being like a developing country, I'm reminded of the winter power outage. They love free markets. It's not worth it to harden the electric grid for an event that rare that…

I live in the SFBA and have far worse uptime and far higher prices than Texas. The smugness from Californians wrt/grid does not make any sense to me. I would trade for Texas electrical grid performance in less than a heartbeat. There was a five hour long outage on Monday while the weather was perfectly lovely. And more than a week cumulative outage in March when the weather was merely a little wet.

Is SFBA's power private? Is LA's power still publicly owned? Do they have power outages (ie Brownouts etc)?

Re: Downtown SF has 18.4M square feet of empty office space. We mapped every vacancy

#372

Post by zbrozek »

theironhammer wrote: post #371
zbrozek wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in the SFBA and have far worse uptime and far higher prices than Texas. The smugness from Californians wrt/grid does not make any sense to me. I would trade for Texas electrical grid performance in less than a heartbeat. There was a five hour long outage on Monday while the weather was perfectly lovely. And more than a week cumulative outage in March when the weather was merely a little wet.

Is SFBA's power private? Is LA's power still publicly owned? Do they have power outages (ie Brownouts etc)?

Most of the SF Bay Area gets its power from PG&E, which is an investor-owned utility. Palo Alto and Santa Clara are exceptions; they have municipal power companies.

Re: Downtown SF has 18.4M square feet of empty office space. We mapped every vacancy

#373

Post by toss1 »

seanw444 wrote: post #366
toss1 wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Um, no. "all 50 states have some provision in their state law, whether it's their state constitution or their state statutes, that prohibits private militia, private paramilitary activity. " [0] "In 2008, the Supreme Court ruled in a major gun rights case, District of Columbia vs. Heller, that citizens had a right to own a firearm for purposes other than being in a militia, namely for self-defense. The ruling affirme…

You can have a private militia, so long as you don't take your operations to the public realm. And if it gets to the point where your militia is useful, then I don't think that law matters anyways. Also, I still find SCOTUS too milquetoast to represent me. They still ruled in favor of permitting, which is blatantly unconstitutional, and to argue otherwise is totally disingenuous. I don't think you're worth my time, n…

>>You can have a private militia, so long as you don't take your operations to the public realm. And if it gets to the point where your militia is useful, then I don't think that law matters anyways.

That sounds kind of self-contradictory. If your 'militia in the private realm' is doing nothing, it seems to be a meaningless organization, or at best a proto-organization, and if it is a useful militia, as in threatening the power of the state or federal govt, that's clearly illegal.

And if you believe that requiring a basic firearms permit to be unconstitutional, it seems that that standard might only apply to 18th-century weapons. An AR or even a good hunting rifle is more deadly than a cannon of those times (and also required more fiddly knowledge & skill to shoot effectively).

I've seen no law or proposal that is anything more than a modest inconvenience for any sane, competent, and responsible person. I don't see how any of the founders would be objecting to that at any level. And this society is both much more complex and the weapons orders of magnitudes more powerful.

And yeah, I agree SCOTUS has enough problems for everyone, about which we could commiserate until the cows come home, and then some.

Re: Downtown SF has 18.4M square feet of empty office space. We mapped every vacancy

#374

Post by alephnerd »

theironhammer wrote: post #370
alephnerd wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not a fan of the GOP and I have actively worked with the DNC, but using HDI (which is the goto metric for comparing development across regions), most US states Red and Blue are roughly comparable to other western European peers. The states that do lag significantly (MS+WV) are comparable to Portugal/Poland/Greece on developmental metrics, but they only represent ~1% of the entire American population and are anomalies…

Fair enough. From the link, I see that the states with the lowest HDIs are Red States while the highest HDIs are mostly all Blue States.

I'd recommend comparing at the region level instead of by state government c. 2010-2023.

Different regions of the US became developed/first world at different times. The Mid-Atlantic and New England for example largely industrialized by the late 1800s and early 1900s, the Midwest by the 1930s, the Western US and Southwest by the 1950s, and the Southern States, Appalachia, and Puerto Rico by the 1980s-90s (thank you LBJ for your War against Poverty in the 60s).

A better comparison would be blue and red states within the same region in the US - for example, Blue Minnesota versus Red Wisconsin or Red Florida and Blue Virginia or Red New Hampshire and Blur Vermont.

The same issue exists within the EU as well btw - this is why Sweden can have some of the best developmental indicators in the world while Bulgaria can have developmental indicators comparable to developed regions of China and India.

Re: Downtown SF has 18.4M square feet of empty office space. We mapped every vacancy

#375

Post by throwawayacc5 »

toss1 wrote: post #294
refurb wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which states? I mean, if you asked me, California’s gun control laws suppress the rights of many people, but I’m guessing you don’t agree? My point is, you have your own political views, but at the same time live in a country with a lot of differing views. You should feel free to live wherever you want but at the same time realize you’ll never find a place that 100% agrees with all your views.

>>California’s gun control laws suppress the rights of many people Seriously? I have a relative who lives in CA and bought a pair of AR-15s a few years ago, just because... I've never seen any serious gun proposal that would actually infringe on any actual right. They are all about ensuring that background checks apply to all sales, waiting periods, red flags, etc. People seem to forget that allowing any mentally ill…

>Seriously?

Yes, seriously.

>I have a relative who lives in CA and bought a pair of AR-15s a few years ago, just because...

No you don't. AR-15s are illegal (felony) in California.

Re: Downtown SF has 18.4M square feet of empty office space. We mapped every vacancy

#376

Post by dragonwriter »

robotresearcher wrote: post #354
refurb wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that is a decision based on the idea that the actual text of the constitution can be ignored - the literal first two phrases of the original text: "“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, ...". Wait, you’re saying the Supreme Court read it wrong, but you read it correctly? That’s your argument?

That’s allowed in America.

> That’s allowed in America.

Not only is it allowed in America, but its is likely sometimes correct, insofar as a matter of interpretation can be said to be (at a minimum, the Supreme Court has been wrong, one time or another) as the Supreme Court has reversed itself on the meaning of Constitutional provisions.

Re: Downtown SF has 18.4M square feet of empty office space. We mapped every vacancy

#377

Post by dang »

frozenport wrote: post #216
bityard wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personal politics, IMO, is not a good reason to avoid living in certain areas. I'm a liberal-leaning moderate but many of my favorite people (friends and family) are conservative, and many of my hobbies tend to be populated mainly by the conservative demographic. You'll always find people here and there who won't give you the time of day if you're not on Team Blue or Team Red, but my take on it is, if I can't make fr…

Red states fuck up the eduction system. What you going to do if your kid tries to make America Great Again, daughter needs an abortion.

Please don't post in the flamewar style to HN. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Downtown SF has 18.4M square feet of empty office space. We mapped every vacancy

#378

Post by shjake »

ESTheComposer wrote: post #337
shjake wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I find it interesting that there was no anti white crime reported in CA but it was the third most reported hate crime in Texas Isn’t that a fairly good indicator that the data is not necessarily comparable between the two states?

I don’t think so no. I’m curious what you think is a better source of data than the FBI who has a standardize definition of hate crime and collects it from all 50 states? I’m not sure how much more comparable you can get, and if we go along your logic then the original point of this thread, which is that some people feel threatened in red states (apparently) because of their sexuality or similar, then there is no dat…

if there are no reports of “ anti white crime ” in California however it’s not uncommon in Texas is it more likely that white people are never the target of hate crimes in California or that is’s under reported there (or over reported in Texas)?

Re: Downtown SF has 18.4M square feet of empty office space. We mapped every vacancy

#379

Post by toss1 »

refurb wrote: post #359
robotresearcher wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s allowed in America.

Yes, legal hobbyists are allowed to disagree with Supreme Court decisions. That doesn’t mean they are right, in fact it almost certainly means they are wrong. So yes, in America you’re allowed to be wrong.

WOW, that is a remarkably bad argument. Straight-up appeal to authority, condescension and social scorn, without substance.

It ignores that all SCOTUS cases are seriously contentious and most were differently decided by multiple appeals courts on different sides of the argument. Then, very few cases are decided 9-0; there is almost always at least one, if not multiple dissenting opinions among the SCOTUS justices themselves.

They are not all wrong, they were on the losing side of the argument.

Before this court, it might be argued that these were at least settled law, but since the current court has obviously decided that precedent is no longer important, the decisions are simply the current state of the law.

At least bring an actual argument with substance on the point of the topic, not "that piddling hobbyist must be wrong" (to agree with the dissenters on a now-notoriously fickle SCOTUS itself). Sheesh.

(eddit: typos)

Re: Downtown SF has 18.4M square feet of empty office space. We mapped every vacancy

#380

Post by toss1 »

throwawayacc5 wrote: post #375
toss1 wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>California’s gun control laws suppress the rights of many people Seriously? I have a relative who lives in CA and bought a pair of AR-15s a few years ago, just because... I've never seen any serious gun proposal that would actually infringe on any actual right. They are all about ensuring that background checks apply to all sales, waiting periods, red flags, etc. People seem to forget that allowing any mentally ill…

>Seriously? Yes, seriously. >I have a relative who lives in CA and bought a pair of AR-15s a few years ago, just because... No you don't. AR-15s are illegal (felony) in California.

Yes, I do.

He purchased them specifically before the law against purchasing them went into effect. I'm no in CA, but I'm quite sure he still has them (or at least did while I visited after the law was in effect) and that the law did not require confiscating previously-owned firearms, i.e., they were grandfathered in.

Post reply on HN