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

941–950 of 1001 posts

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

#941

Post by diebeforei485 »

hamandcheese wrote: post #819
tayo42 wrote: post #558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I interviewed there around then, I remeber getting off at civic center bart station on my way in wondering to my self if I really want to do this commute everyday and what kind if effect it would have on me. Then I got the offer and was like, I'll figure it out hah. Sketchy mornings watching all the drug dealing happening hoping I wouldn't accidently look at the wrong person the wrong way or something.

Isn't van ness station closer to Twitter?

The Van Ness station is not particularly pleasant either. Come out of the subway and see this: https://x.com/sfdsrvsbttr/status/1809986173844279305?s=46

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

#942

Post by dnissley »

hintymad wrote: post #697
trgn wrote: post #629

Earlier quoted context omitted.

turn of the century suburbs truly are goldilocks neighborhoods.

Unfortunately the US demolished such urban structures to make space for cars and parking spaces. We now get a small downtown with clusters of skyscrapers, and then endless urban sprawl. It definitely made the cities of the US ugly, especially when compared to the European cities.

They still exist, but they are generally absurdly expensive because lots of people want to live there and they aren't particularly dense (although denser than plenty of other areas)

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

#943

Post by snapcaster »

rapatel0 wrote: post #692
neilv wrote: post #679

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Question from someone who doesn't know the SF neighborhoods... Can a single, childless tech startup-type person live comfortably walking car-free in contemporary SF, long-term? If so, how much does that cost, and in what neighborhoods? Reason I'm asking: the East Coast city where I currently live isn't great for software startups, and, on top of some crazy downsides of this city, there's a possibly emerging new downs…

> Can a single, childless tech startup-type person live comfortably walking car-free in contemporary SF, long-term? If so, how much does that cost, and in what neighborhoods? I used this when doing analysis. It's pretty good. https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/comparison.jsp From a pure cost, POV you burn most of your money on rent and food. When we had visitors, I had to plan out my budget to cover meals for ever…

Holy shit i feel bad for SF folks. It's crazy how you've normalized:

>In terms of security, If you keep your head on a swivel then you're fine. I had the same alertness that I have when traveling a foreign country. You need to be on high alert all the time.

do you not realize this is really bad and not some reality of the world? Just the terrible city you live in?

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

#944

Post by [deleted] »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #806
bluGill wrote: post #534

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> Parks in the city tend to be focused on art. They often lack kid basics like swings and sand. They tend to be too small for a ball game. Often the people who are there will yell at kids for running off the path, yelling and the other ways kids play. This doesn’t describe Seattle or any other city I’ve lived in. We literally have 3 huge ball fields within walking distance of my town home, all full up on weekends and…

[deleted]

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

#945

Post by ncr100 »

htrp wrote: post #56
zknill wrote: post #51

I don't know US commutes, or US geography too well. But it seems these two locations are about 45mins-1hr drive from each other. Where do folks actually live in those areas? Is it that a 30min drive north to San Fran becomes a 30min drive south to San Jose?

More like the easy commute you had in San Francisco on muni (the bus and subway network of San Francisco) becomes an annoying hour and a half-long commute on bart (The regional train system) with 2-3 transfers

.. and being "close" to the occasional death: The inter-city CalTrain (the outside of the train) is used frequently by those amongst us who pursue suicide, and aside from that dropping a mini-nuke on society / friends + family, another side-effect is 2-3 hours of delay on CalTrain. Overall, a traumatic and unhealthy commute.

Living in SF and working in South Bay sucked for me, when I did that, for that reason in particular.

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

#946

Post by tayo42 »

hamandcheese wrote: post #819
tayo42 wrote: post #558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I interviewed there around then, I remeber getting off at civic center bart station on my way in wondering to my self if I really want to do this commute everyday and what kind if effect it would have on me. Then I got the offer and was like, I'll figure it out hah. Sketchy mornings watching all the drug dealing happening hoping I wouldn't accidently look at the wrong person the wrong way or something.

Isn't van ness station closer to Twitter?

Maybe, I used to live closer to a Bart station and it was faster so I always took that down town if I could.

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

#947

Post by Dylan16807 »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #846
sneak wrote: post #776

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Statistically speaking, women are almost never physically attacked by strangers, it is almost always someone they know. Men are attacked by strangers at a much much higher rate than women are.

I'm not sure what your point is to be honest, are you saying women are safe in that area at that time of night because of global statistics?

"I didn't feel that threatened, but I can only imagine how X group would feel" doesn't make much sense if X group is actually at a lower risk.

I don't know if they're right at all, but the point seems pretty clear. And they're not saying anyone is safe.

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

#948

Post by omegaworks »

greenavocado wrote: post #891
flanked-evergl wrote: post #882

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do the citizens of SF like living in such squalor?

Homeless industrial complex. First you cause the crisis then you profit off of the solutions that claim to fix it (but never fix it). https://yandex.com/search/touch/?text=san+francisco+homeless...

Blame the homeless and people trying to help them, take the blame off the real problem: few available homes with high prices[1].

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10574586/#:~:te....

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

#949

Post by omegaworks »

flanked-evergl wrote: post #895
greenavocado wrote: post #891

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Homeless industrial complex. First you cause the crisis then you profit off of the solutions that claim to fix it (but never fix it). https://yandex.com/search/touch/?text=san+francisco+homeless...

But the citizens of SF can just stop electing local governments that fund this, yet they don't. I can certainly see how they contributed to causing the crisis (i.e. by electing people who caused it), but I don't see how they profit from it, unless the people in SF likes such conditions, which seems pretty weird, at least to me.

>the people in SF likes such conditions

The people in SF like their million dollar shoeboxes to appreciate in value, with zero regard for the externalities that scheme creates[1].

1. https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/articles/...

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

#950

Post by azinman2 »

golergka wrote: post #414
caycep wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

vs "I never understood why the company would not pay taxes to improve the environment around its chosen home"?

Like paying $2m for a public bathroom?

*300k in reality: https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/san-francisco/san-fran...
Post reply on HN