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

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

sfstandard.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 1001 posts

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

#611

Post by weitendorf »

zamfi wrote: post #577
saagarjha wrote: post #564

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google has offices in San Francisco but it also has offices in South San Francisco, San Bruno, Redwood City, Palo Alto, Mountain View, Sunnyvale, and San Jose. And probably some other cities I forgot. The "reason" Google has an office anywhere has to do more with "why not" rather than anything else.

Acquisitions.

Not the case with the main Google SF office (except now some buildings are indeed the results of acquisitions) but definitely for San Bruno and varied for the other ones.

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

#612

Post by thatfrenchguy »

bluGill wrote: post #534
curiousllama wrote: post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cities' attractiveness feels u-shaped Young adults love it bc they have the time to go to bars/restaurants/clubs Middle aged folks hate it because they're so busy - they can't take advantage, and other people get in their way (some) Older folks like it again bc they have the time to go to restaurants/theater

Middle ages folks hate it because they are most likely to have kids and cities (in the US) tend to be kid hostile. What I'm calling city below is probably better described as downtown - most cities extend out farther and have areas that are nothing like what follows - but are also nothing like what you described as what people move to the city for. Parks in the city tend to be focused on art. They often lack kid basi…

San Francisco has really really good playgrounds, it's quite crazy.

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

#613

Post by burningChrome »

acedTrex wrote: post #501
janalsncm wrote: post #371

Had a recruiter call with Twitter a few months ago. Mandatory in office 5 days per week. Among other things, an hour commute both ways to work was not acceptable. Maybe they will have better luck in Santa Clara. I don’t buy any of the flamebait reasons for leaving SF. Reason 1 is money and reason 2 is talent pool.

[flagged]

[flagged]

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

#614

Post by fantasybuilder »

gumby wrote: post #497
hintymad wrote: post #412

There is a famous paper about the location of company headquarters: they get as close as possible to the residence of company CEOs. If we don't consider the CEO's influence, I'm actually curious if the location of company headquarters has to do with the average age of the employees in the Bay Area. As the employees start to have families, they most likely move to the south bay for better or for worse, and I have a ha…

Back in the early 90s my wife and I moved to SF because it had a thriving art and music scene and more interesting culture than the 'burbs of palo alto. But as you say, the long commute to SV was a killer and we moved back down. Back then SF was a bedroom community for SV with no tech sector. Businesses up there were banking (Wells Fargo, BofA, Crocker etc), retail, the local stock exchange, and a bunch of manufactur…

Depends on one's interests. It sounds like my preferences would be more in alignment with yours - music and art - and yes, SF is almost completely lacking that today. But if one were an active part of the LGBT community - SF is a buzzing option. They have various festivals and events almost daily.

Oakland music scene isn't particularly inspiring either. Definitely more independent music events in run down houses, but quality and inventiveness is too often of questionable value.

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

#615

Post by hi-v-rocknroll »

rapatel0 wrote: post #468

I lived for about 12 months in telegraph hill (got lucky with a solid apartment). I had my wife and 1 year old son. Despite it being a really nice and affluent neighborhood, there was a weekly mugging outside my house. Any packages or items left outside were basically taken if left out for more than 1 hour. My neighbor’s car parked in front of the house was stolen, taken for a joyride and left in a random part of the…

While SF is a nice place to visit, but the sheer numbers of unreasonable, lemming-like people who will spend and do anything to cling to live there as some sort of Promised Land™ make it a hellish place to try to live a sustainable life for almost everyone who isn't already a multimillionaire. Keeping a car parked in SF to as far south as San Mateo on the street is a recipe for catalytic converter theft.

Visit the de Young museum's observation tower. It has a spectacular vantage point. The other things California have are: less annoying creepy crawlies, more variety of scenery and microclimates, weather, food, and relatively cheaper property taxes.

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

#616

Post by MetaWhirledPeas »

thih9 wrote: post #600

Is the constant stream of flamebait (this action and other recent changes) helpful for twitter, or part of some larger strategy? To me the service seems increasingly unreliable and unprofessional. Then again, I no longer feel like I'm the target audience. The numbers seem bad too; revenue was 22% down in 2023[1]. Also, "global active daily users of X via mobile apps had steadily declined during the year after Musk ac…

> Is the constant stream of flamebait helpful for twitter, or part of some larger strategy?

I don't think much thought was put into it, but I do think there will be a gradual numbing effect among the comments as people get bored of the criticism. Maybe very gradual though.

Edit: It just occurred to me that you might be referring to user posts on the platform being flamebait; my answer assumed that the action (moving the HQ) was perhaps flamebait, along with other recent changes.

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

#617

Post by hi-v-rocknroll »

janalsncm wrote: post #371

Had a recruiter call with Twitter a few months ago. Mandatory in office 5 days per week. Among other things, an hour commute both ways to work was not acceptable. Maybe they will have better luck in Santa Clara. I don’t buy any of the flamebait reasons for leaving SF. Reason 1 is money and reason 2 is talent pool.

Santa Clara-San Jose area is relatively still damn expensive. (Ask me how I know.)

Anywhere with an RTO mandate is a hard pass. If they want to treat their employees like children and waste my time and money on pointless commuting to feel in-control, then count me out.

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

#618

Post by saagarjha »

weitendorf wrote: post #609
saagarjha wrote: post #564

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google has offices in San Francisco but it also has offices in South San Francisco, San Bruno, Redwood City, Palo Alto, Mountain View, Sunnyvale, and San Jose. And probably some other cities I forgot. The "reason" Google has an office anywhere has to do more with "why not" rather than anything else.

That's not really how the SF presence developed historically but I admire your confidence

Did you mean to reply to me?

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

#619

Post by hi-v-rocknroll »

latentcall wrote: post #516
acedTrex wrote: post #501

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Agree but it appears a sizeable amount of young men see themselves in him somehow and therefore idolize him. As long as he has that cult of personality, people will gladly accept the abuse for a chance to be near him.

You appear to be describing a cult of personality. Cults exist. They're still cults. It takes perspective, common sense, and internal self-worth to not fall for such.

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

#620

Post by [deleted] »

MetaWhirledPeas wrote: post #616
thih9 wrote: post #600

Is the constant stream of flamebait (this action and other recent changes) helpful for twitter, or part of some larger strategy? To me the service seems increasingly unreliable and unprofessional. Then again, I no longer feel like I'm the target audience. The numbers seem bad too; revenue was 22% down in 2023[1]. Also, "global active daily users of X via mobile apps had steadily declined during the year after Musk ac…

> Is the constant stream of flamebait helpful for twitter, or part of some larger strategy? I don't think much thought was put into it, but I do think there will be a gradual numbing effect among the comments as people get bored of the criticism. Maybe very gradual though. Edit: It just occurred to me that you might be referring to user posts on the platform being flamebait; my answer assumed that the action (moving…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN