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

San Francisco library turning off WiFi at night to keep homeless from using it

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 184 posts

Re: San Francisco library turning off WiFi at night to keep homeless from using it

#51

Post by hbcondo714 »

bastard_op wrote: post #11

City of Santa Monica was having to do the same thing to keep homeless from piling up around the library for Internet access. The Library became the hub for all homeless in the region for the wifi alone. Seeing as they run a data center in the basement I had to access working there, it was always an adventure to visit.

I had a similar experience not too far away in Marina Del Rey. I would work remotely out of their small public library but there were so many homeless people to the point all the tables were occupied. They mostly used the electric outlets and DVDs so I ended up going to a paid co-working space and being around like-minded individuals with plenty of space.

Re: San Francisco library turning off WiFi at night to keep homeless from using it

#52

Post by notaustinpowers »

Hermitian909 wrote: post #38
notaustinpowers wrote: post #12

Every day I start to believe more and more that people won't stop with homelessness until every homeless person is dead. "Emergency housing is a drain on taxpayer dollars." "Job placement is taking jobs away from locals." "Soup kitchens are another drain on taxpayer money." "Homeless services are a waste of money." It makes me sick how people can act when it comes to the homeless population when so many of us are jus…

As someone who volunteers with the homeless a lot I mostly agree, but I will take the other side for a moment: It's very hard to a voter base who feel financially squeezed that their taxes should be going to people who, usually, are not holding down a job. They're "doing everything right" and feel the government is robbing Peter to pay Paul as it were. There are a lot of sophisticated answers we can give as to why th…

I think the issue isn't how much citizens are paying in taxes. I think it's how the government is allocating those funds. For example, my town I live in has average rent prices for 1 bedroom apartments ABOVE the medium HOUSEHOLD income. Our homeless population is starting to get out of control. Every day there are 3 to 4 homeless families with their children at the local mall intersection asking for assistance, because the city only has 13 units set aside for homeless housing.

But we spend 100s of millions a year on one public high schools sports budget.

The government is the party that should be responsible, and I'm tired of the onus of the responsibility being put on the citizens. Why else do we PAY taxes for if not for these social services?

Re: San Francisco library turning off WiFi at night to keep homeless from using it

#53

Post by JumpCrisscross »

Hermitian909 wrote: post #38
notaustinpowers wrote: post #12

Every day I start to believe more and more that people won't stop with homelessness until every homeless person is dead. "Emergency housing is a drain on taxpayer dollars." "Job placement is taking jobs away from locals." "Soup kitchens are another drain on taxpayer money." "Homeless services are a waste of money." It makes me sick how people can act when it comes to the homeless population when so many of us are jus…

As someone who volunteers with the homeless a lot I mostly agree, but I will take the other side for a moment: It's very hard to a voter base who feel financially squeezed that their taxes should be going to people who, usually, are not holding down a job. They're "doing everything right" and feel the government is robbing Peter to pay Paul as it were. There are a lot of sophisticated answers we can give as to why th…

“A Republic, if you can keep it.”

The quote came to mind while I listened to a Radiolab episode on police surveillance [1]. We usually take it to mean opposing tyranny, even when convenient. But that might be too simple.

For every Patrick Henry there are dozens who prefer not to die. If we let the security situation devolve out of sympathy, or inequality increase in pursuit of efficiency, those people will snap and prompt a brutal backlash.

I’m not suggesting we re-criminalise homelessness. But the status quo, with the permanent homeless population, isn’t working. I don’t know how much one quashes one’s sympathy for the less fortunate and sense for technological progress to achieve these ends, but it’s becoming clear we have to explore toward that boundary. Open-air hard drug use, theft of non-essential goods, aggression and refusal to receive psychiatric screening (note: not treatment); these seem like low-hanging fruit to target zero of. Hell, make it part of a grand bargain to improve the transient homeless population’s wellbeing.

[1] https://radiolab.org/podcast/eye-sky

Re: San Francisco library turning off WiFi at night to keep homeless from using it

#54

Post by dijit »

0xB31B1B wrote: post #46
notaustinpowers wrote: post #12

Every day I start to believe more and more that people won't stop with homelessness until every homeless person is dead. "Emergency housing is a drain on taxpayer dollars." "Job placement is taking jobs away from locals." "Soup kitchens are another drain on taxpayer money." "Homeless services are a waste of money." It makes me sick how people can act when it comes to the homeless population when so many of us are jus…

Library wifi is not a homeless service. An 24 hour open seat on a subway is not a homeless service. Parks where children play is not a homeless service. Public goods being overtaken by an antisocial drug users in the name of homeless support is not progressive.

The cost to run the service though is as close to zero as you can possibly get.

It just feels somewhat inhumane to take something away which is a marginal cost and at best and doesn't cause harm.

I mean, Libraries themselves do not need to exist, they are a service, they don't earn money, under pure capitalism they can't exist. But we know as a society that it improves social mobility and education.

and I mean, you can't do a lot these days without access to internet.

Re: San Francisco library turning off WiFi at night to keep homeless from using it

#55

Post by [deleted] »

nubb wrote: post #25

everyone acting so shocked here probably hasn’t had your home robbed, your car windows broken, or been assaulted and/or robbed by a drugged out bum. at some point enough is enough and they gotta go. i think it’s a juvenile attitude to look down your nose at the endless victims and tell them to just be more understanding of the hardships the homeless face.

[deleted]

Re: San Francisco library turning off WiFi at night to keep homeless from using it

#56

Post by stickfigure »

notaustinpowers wrote: post #12

Every day I start to believe more and more that people won't stop with homelessness until every homeless person is dead. "Emergency housing is a drain on taxpayer dollars." "Job placement is taking jobs away from locals." "Soup kitchens are another drain on taxpayer money." "Homeless services are a waste of money." It makes me sick how people can act when it comes to the homeless population when so many of us are jus…

What's your address and WiFi password? Maybe we can turn your neighborhood into the homeless camp known for free wifi.

Homelessness is a complex subject but the impact of homeless people is not spread evenly. The people that live in that neighborhood (I used to be one) don't want it concentrated there. A few homeless people might be tolerable; a major camp is not, and free wifi at night acts as a magnet. I don't blame them at all for shutting it off.

Re: San Francisco library turning off WiFi at night to keep homeless from using it

#57

Post by reaperducer »

criddell wrote: post #21
joenot443 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In NYC the DHS intakes and beds 60,000 homeless people _every single night_. To say that there aren't solutions in place is incorrect. At least in NYC, the folks you see sleeping on sidewalks have broadly chosen that position over a bed in a shelter. It's a point of pride for many New Yorkers that if you're homeless and willing to get clean, the city will provide a bed for you every night. https://www.nyc.gov/assets/…

Are there similar services for people who won't or can't get clean?

Are there similar services for people who won't or can't get clean?

I have a vague memory that there was a court decision stating that someone cannot be forcibly made un-homeless unless they're a danger to themselves or others.

I'm sure there are some IANALs here who can clarify my murky memory.

Re: San Francisco library turning off WiFi at night to keep homeless from using it

#58

Post by somerandomqaguy »

notaustinpowers wrote: post #12

Every day I start to believe more and more that people won't stop with homelessness until every homeless person is dead. "Emergency housing is a drain on taxpayer dollars." "Job placement is taking jobs away from locals." "Soup kitchens are another drain on taxpayer money." "Homeless services are a waste of money." It makes me sick how people can act when it comes to the homeless population when so many of us are jus…

I doubt they want them dead. If I had to guess, I'd say they just want them gone.

How many people would look the other way if we were talking putting homeless into death camps and mass murdering them, that I have no idea about.

Re: San Francisco library turning off WiFi at night to keep homeless from using it

#59

Post by piloto_ciego »

nubb wrote: post #25

everyone acting so shocked here probably hasn’t had your home robbed, your car windows broken, or been assaulted and/or robbed by a drugged out bum. at some point enough is enough and they gotta go. i think it’s a juvenile attitude to look down your nose at the endless victims and tell them to just be more understanding of the hardships the homeless face.

[flagged]

Re: San Francisco library turning off WiFi at night to keep homeless from using it

#60

Post by derefr »

generalizations wrote: post #39
derefr wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that unlike people with homes (who are generally stuck in one place — wherever their home is), homeless people have nothing holding them to places inhospitable to their presence. So the homeless diffuse around countries, drifting from place to place, until they settle in an "attractor" city — a local optimum for homeless hospitable-ness (with more social-welfare programs for them; less police suppressi…

All you do then is turn the entire country into an "attractor country" - faced with the 'homeless problem' of the rest of the world. Which is, ironically, one of the issues raised against open borders.

Homeless people are generally not allowed to cross borders pretty much anywhere in the world, except under special conditions (e.g. being considered a refugee fleeing a warzone or failed state.)

This is why most countries' border services will ask short-term visitors the address of the place they'll be staying while they're there: no country, no matter how open its borders, wants you to visit with the goal of becoming a beggar on their streets.

(And this is also a large part of why particular passports only let you visit particular places without a visa. The EU has internally-open borders for EU citizens, because they have mostly equalized levels of social-welfare "pressure" between countries. But no EU country will let you in from a non-EU developing country that has high levels of homelessness, if you can't prove income; and that's something the EU enforces on its member states, so that no country becomes the de-facto homeless ingress point for the whole of the EU.)

Because of these measures, each country (or open-bordered region of equal-welfare countries) is mostly just dealing with its own homeless problem, not with other countries'/regions' homeless problems.

Post reply on HN