Twitter kills its San Francisco headquarters, will relocate to South Bay • Hacker News Board

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

#541

Post by willmadden » Tue, Aug 06, 2024, 8:29 PM UTC

MSFT_Edging wrote: post #440

smsm42 wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If by "everywhere" you mean "major megapolises with crime problems", then yes, everywhere. Otherwise, no, not everywhere, and yes, in a suburban location a chance of a shooting happening under your very office window is extremely low. Living/working in a megapolis has its advantages, but let's not paint over its downsides also. Criminals want the same advantages too.

Cities tend to have a lower per-capita crime rate, it's just dense and visible. This is just suburban paranoia. Crime happens.

No, it's not just suburban paranoia. Travel to Tokyo or Singapore and then to S.F.

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

#542

Post by pjerem » Tue, Aug 06, 2024, 8:30 PM UTC

smcin wrote: post #165

pjerem wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also free speech in law just means you can’t be prosecuted to say stupid things. It doesn’t mean that anyone owes you the canal to say your stupid things. The previous twitter had (somehow) moderation. You would think what you want about it but you were free to use your free speech right elsewhere. The difference is that Musk says that it gives you this canal but he lies because he is still moderating the network, ex…

I think when you say 'canal' you mean 'channel' (translating from French?), or more commonly 'platform'.

You are right, thank you

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

#543

Post by willmadden » Tue, Aug 06, 2024, 8:32 PM UTC

aqme28 wrote: post #420

smsm42 wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If by "everywhere" you mean "major megapolises with crime problems", then yes, everywhere. Otherwise, no, not everywhere, and yes, in a suburban location a chance of a shooting happening under your very office window is extremely low. Living/working in a megapolis has its advantages, but let's not paint over its downsides also. Criminals want the same advantages too.

You're right of course, but it's sort of meaningless. I live in Germany where there isn't nearly as much gun crime, but Musk isn't about to move Twitter to Germany.

Don't your police regularly jail people for non-violent speech? I don't see Musk moving to Germany.

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

#544

Post by labrador » Tue, Aug 06, 2024, 8:33 PM UTC

mplewis wrote: post #379

ionwake wrote: post #80

As 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?

My advice: Never move to San Jose.

I like it here. I've lived many different places in America. San Jose has the best weather or most suitable for me anyway

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

#545

Post by tomtheelder » Tue, Aug 06, 2024, 8:34 PM UTC

015a wrote: post #423

autoexecbat wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It ultimately doesn't matter what a company wants to call themselves if the vast public just uses the old name

I mean, it does matter, and also HackerNews is the only bubble I interact with regularly that still holds on to the Twitter name like gollum and the one ring. My understanding is that HN has rules against editorialization of headlines. This absolutely qualifies. The company is called X, the article calls it X. You don't have to like it, you don't have to use that name when you speak about the company, but editorializ…

I have never heard anyone in real life call it X.

I do agree that the headline shouldn’t be editorialized, though. “X (formerly Twitter)” at most.

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

#546

Post by dang » Tue, Aug 06, 2024, 8:34 PM UTC

robxorb wrote: post #538

dang wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did that because I don't know anyone who doesn't still call it Twitter.

Well, when I got up this morning I didn't think I'd be doing this today: > please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize.

Both names are linkbait. I think 'Twitter' is less misleading than 'X', so it wins the guideline on points.

Not saying it's a strong case, just that it tilts that way. Others would call it differently and that's always the case with a close call.

Just because you buy something doesn't mean you get to change popular usage by decree. There's a whiff of corporatism about that which sticks in my craw.

(I am not, god help us, making any implicit point about the muskwars.)

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

#547

Post by dang » Tue, Aug 06, 2024, 8:35 PM UTC

awb wrote: post #395

dang wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did that because I don't know anyone who doesn't still call it Twitter.

X (formerly Twitter) is how I’ve seen it cited elsewhere.

That's the safest, but it runs up against HN's 80 char limit on titles and also feels clumsy and formalistic.

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

#548

Post by confidantlake » Tue, Aug 06, 2024, 8:36 PM UTC

anotherhue wrote: post #143

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…

during one visit to those Zendesk offices an urgent slack message (verily) was sent out advising everyone to get away from the windows, as there was shooting outside. About 10 minutes later also via Slack the CEO announced not to worry it was simply one drug dealer shooting another drug dealer in the back. Everyone could return to their desks. I never understood why the company would put its employees in danger until…

You are much more likely to die in a commute on your way to work than you are from some drug dealer.

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

#549

Post by bboygravity » Tue, Aug 06, 2024, 8:36 PM UTC

debacle wrote: post #392

Does Elon still dislike/disallow remote work? Seems like that would be a competitive disadvantage.

But then, like with all of Elon's companies, the question is: who's the (serious) competition?

Rethorical question... There is none.

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

#550

Post by sangnoir » Tue, Aug 06, 2024, 8:38 PM UTC

WheatMillington wrote: post #512

sangnoir wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I never understood why the company would put its employees in danger... Like forcing them to drive to the office 2-5 days each week when they could continue working from home?

This is peak HN - "stop putting me in danger be making me leave my house"

Go ahead and complete the thought in the context of the comment I was replying to and review if your "dunk" is conflicting with the point I'm making...

Companies inconvenience and put their employees in danger (of varying levels) at the whims of management. They will sign a lease in a high-crime neighborhood to get a tax break, they will force you to come to the office because the CEO loves and misses the "energy" of having butts in seats and the employees will be forced to take on the non-zero probability of being involved in a traffic accident - its not nothing; auto insurance companies sent refunds during lockdowns because of this.