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

981–990 of 1001 posts

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

#981

Post by diogenescynic »

omegaworks wrote: post #949
flanked-evergl wrote: post #895

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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/...

Exactly. The residents could vote to build more shelters or do something/anything realistic to solve the homeless issue (other than just giving them money/tents/needles), but if they build more homes then that increases the supply of homes which residents are fundamentally against. They don't want any new housing to ever be approved for any levels/neighborhoods because by restricting supply it pushes prices up.

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

#982

Post by sershe »

watwut wrote: post #841
next_xibalba wrote: post #655

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think the engineers at Tesla and SpaceX, who have created jaw dropping technical marvels, don’t respect themselves? I’m not saying Musk isn’t an asshole, I don’t know him. And I’m willing to guess you don’t either. But it’s real hard to argue that his companies haven’t done amazing engineering results.

Honestly, given everything I have heard about working conditions there, yes they dont have much self respect. Regardless of what Musk personality is.

It's nice to unpack the assumptions behind this (and gp) comments. You know, honestly, why I won't work for twitter in 2024? Or Tesla, or SpaceX. Because I don't respect myself enough as an engineer. Even if we assume I had the skill (which, for Twitter, I probably do; for the other two, unlikely), I don't care enough about developing technology to devote my life to it, I want to check out after a regular work day and go hang out with my wife or climb or play board games. Better - more engaged, at least - engineers can go work for Twitter.

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

#983

Post by onlyrealcuzzo »

ayakang31415 wrote: post #960
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #666

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Musk runs Twitter like a dictator. The first and only reason is whatever Musk felt like. Twitter was imperically a terrible financial decision. It seems like a bold statement to say the #1 is de facto money. I suspect non-money issues are much higher on the list. If anyone on the planet doesn't need more money, it's Musk.

TBF, Elon has been running his other companies like he is running Twitter. Also, isn't it his prerogative to run his companies however he pleases as he is the CEO? If the shareholders are not happy with it, they can push him out.

Most CEOs aren't worth >$200B...

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

#984

Post by watwut »

sershe wrote: post #982
watwut wrote: post #841

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, given everything I have heard about working conditions there, yes they dont have much self respect. Regardless of what Musk personality is.

It's nice to unpack the assumptions behind this (and gp) comments. You know, honestly, why I won't work for twitter in 2024? Or Tesla, or SpaceX. Because I don't respect myself enough as an engineer. Even if we assume I had the skill (which, for Twitter, I probably do; for the other two, unlikely), I don't care enough about developing technology to devote my life to it, I want to check out after a regular work day an…

Meh. Being unable to check out does not make one superior engineer. Persistent long hours are predictor of a lot of bugs and correlated with chaotic management. They are not actually correlated with some kind of greatness.

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

#985

Post by fooker »

knowaveragejoe wrote: post #380
fooker wrote: post #17

Good riddance. That part of San Francisco has been worse than the risky areas of most third world cities for the last 3-4 years. I don't understand how this beautiful city was let to deteriorate so fast.

> worse than the risky areas of most third world cities for the last 3-4 years You can just say that you never leave well-to-do regions of the US in less words.

I am from a second tier city in a third world country, and have traveled extensively around South Asia and Africa.

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

#986

Post by curiousllama »

dfxm12 wrote: post #582
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

For another couple data points - my middle aged friends with kids who moved to my city did so for much of the same reason as you suggest the younger and older folks do. There's just more services for their kids: clubs, day care, pediatrics, playgrounds, sports teams, museums, etc. I have a few middle aged friends who moved away from my city, but they moved to bigger cities (Chicago, NYC) for work.

Curious, if you ever see this - where in the city did they move? Like an inner suburb/outer ring of the city? Into a block of townhouses/condos? Near family/friends?

I'm curious how folks who happily live in the city with kids approach it

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

#987

Post by smsm42 »

azinman2 wrote: post #950
golergka wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like paying $2m for a public bathroom?

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

Note though the reduction didn't come from anything getting in fact more efficient, but from "two companies donated materials and installation" - probably to quell the bad press. And it looks like $1.7m is still going to get spent, just maybe on two toilets instead of one.

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

#988

Post by snotrockets »

highcountess wrote: post #876
snotrockets wrote: post #783

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was also true in mission bay, is true in Lakeshore, and I assume other neighborhoods too. It shouldn’t be like that, but those are the priorities we (as society and electorate) decided on.

That is a quite ironic statement considering that Twitter has been an integral part of modern social engineering to reprogram people into accepting and tolerating the intolerable and unacceptable. So here we are, at a point where people not only self-censor, they will even get violently aggressive or simply will suppress speech or even the ability to read or hear what someone has said if it diverges from the cult rul…

Have you touched grass recently? I wholeheartedly recommend it.

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

#989

Post by sagz »

paulsutter wrote: post #434

The issue is the San Francisco gross receipts tax, which becomes problematic for any payments company because it applies to the payments volume Twitter is planning to become a payments platform

Interesting. How does Stripe and other SF based payment platforms handle it?

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

#990

Post by littlestymaar »

wonderwonder wrote: post #383
pcwalton wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's pretty undeniable that the bot problem is significantly worse than it was before Musk. (I'm not going to take a position on the value of any of the other changes to the product.)

It is interesting that they appear to have solved or at least dramatically reduced the porn spam. Still cant open a post though without seeing 10+ posts about something completely unrelated in the comments

I don't think porn spam reduced at all, but indeed “engagement spam” has skyrocketed which makes porn spam less visible on popular tweets (but it's still prevalent everywhere else). And there's also much more sex workers than ever before advertising their onlyfan…
Post reply on HN