OT: San Fransisco

[XXtwindad]

Originally Posted by stefthehat

I know it’s not by her ,I thought the ‘also’ was enough to hint to folk that if they enjoyed Solnit they might enjoy another book

Ah got it. “Cool Grey City of Love” is one of my favorite books.

“Pictures of a Gone City” is also a great read of post tech SF. Both written without the occasional “holier than thou” sanctimony of Solnit.

[MikeD]

Originally Posted by jemoryl

Interesting, well written stuff on SF: https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v46/...silicon-valley

A tiny bit of bike content. I haven't visited for maybe 15 years, what do the locals think?

I say "Meh..." to that article. While many problems are cited, the writer seems to be in denial. I've lived in the Bay Area for 40 years and crime, open drug use, and homelessness have literally exploded, not to mention cost of living, but yes, not limited to only San Francisco. It used to be better for sure. Things are beginning to turn around, but progress is not being made fast enough IMO.

[sfo1]

I don't work in tech, but the author seems to point the finger. Its easy to say the 'tech bro' messed up SF. I will say its a factor for the current state of affairs, but minor.

Drugs, crime, homelessness; its a problem - no doubt. Definitely not the tech bro's doing. I've had a few runs-ins; an attempted garage break in (unsuccessful), package theft, homeless trying to set up camp on my block (unsuccessful), the sick in the stomach feeling of anger as you stand in line at Walgreens and watch some punks fill their bags and walk out undeterred. My kids (13 yrs old) have had interactions; we give them a fairly long leash as I trust them. One rides the bus w/out fear (although I get stories about iPhone's getting jacked/robbed or fights on the bus). They have both seen it all; the drug use, fights between mentally disturbed, rampant theft, etc. But, its a learning experience and they are street smart (already). By the time they get out of high school they will have seen it / experienced it all; a life's lesson.

The blame for the current state of affairs (in SF) falls to the feet of the mayor and the BOS. They failed the citizens and are to blame.

I've lived here for over 30 years and am vested here; my home, my business, my friends. I've seen several cycles. This is just another. It will last longer than most due to the hit its had (and more coming) in the lack of revenue to the city gov. But, it will pass. Hopefully with a smaller, more efficient and 'open minded' local govt.

And, when I've had enough, its an eight minute ride to the GGB and I am heading out of dodge!

YRMV

[stefthehat]

I think I had worked out she grinds your gears ,I was also at fault in assuming folk knew of her SF book of years ago .I think whatever people might think of her ‘politics’ etc blah blah what comes through is a love of the people and the city ,only discovered her via Iain Sinclairs books on London[England],thanks for the book recommendation looks interesting

[zetroc]

SF is a great city that has seen many booms and busts, many Gold Rushes, and will always be a magnet for interesting people. The current woes are not caused by any single problem, and people quick to blame "The Democrats" are really showing their asses. The City has seen worse and will be there long after Tucker Carlson is dead.

Rebecca Solnit is a great writer and I will recommend her book on SF and Edward Muybridge, "River of Shadows" to anyone.

[dustyrider]

Huh. I’m sure I’m missing something but isn’t this sort of like the threads lamenting the days of rim brakes, mechanical groups, and tubed tires? It sort of feels like someone should be sending the author a picture of an old man yelling at a cloud in the sky. In fact if the author didn’t make such an effort to inform me that the world apparently thinks so poorly of the city, and that the wealthy have contributed in some way to this belief, I may have never known, but I have made quite the conscious effort over the years to avoid mainstream entertainment news and political satire.

To me San Francisco has always been a place to visit not a place I would ever want to live. I sure am glad so many people seemingly love living in cities like San Francisco though because it means places like where I live will stay just the way they are for quite some time.

[zetroc]

Huh. I’m sure I’m missing something but isn’t this sort of like the threads lamenting the days of rim brakes, mechanical groups, and tubed tires? It sort of feels like someone should be sending the author a picture of an old man yelling at a cloud in the sky.

People loathe change because they fear it, and they fear change because it reminds them of their mortality, and they fear reminders of their mortality because our country was founded by Puritans who instilled the fear of death (and Judgment Day) into their children for generations.

But change is the only constant in life; one might as well fight the sea, or the sky, or the sun. So it goes.

[bshell]

Outsiders bashing 'democrat run' cities has been a main topic for several years now so it is sort of incredible you haven't seen it.

Technology (or any influx of great wealth) does not cause opioid addiction or the associated mental health/crime/nuisance but it does upset existing balances.

I loathe bad and foolish change (subjective, I know) but it has nothing to do with fear or my mortality.

[krooj]

Originally Posted by sfo1

I don't work in tech, but the author seems to point the finger. Its easy to say the 'tech bro' messed up SF. I will say its a factor for the current state of affairs, but minor.

Drugs, crime, homelessness; its a problem - no doubt. Definitely not the tech bro's doing. I've had a few runs-ins; an attempted garage break in (unsuccessful), package theft, homeless trying to set up camp on my block (unsuccessful), the sick in the stomach feeling of anger as you stand in line at Walgreens and watch some punks fill their bags and walk out undeterred. My kids (13 yrs old) have had interactions; we give them a fairly long leash as I trust them. One rides the bus w/out fear (although I get stories about iPhone's getting jacked/robbed or fights on the bus). They have both seen it all; the drug use, fights between mentally disturbed, rampant theft, etc. But, its a learning experience and they are street smart (already). By the time they get out of high school they will have seen it / experienced it all; a life's lesson.

The blame for the current state of affairs (in SF) falls to the feet of the mayor and the BOS. They failed the citizens and are to blame.

I've lived here for over 30 years and am vested here; my home, my business, my friends. I've seen several cycles. This is just another. It will last longer than most due to the hit its had (and more coming) in the lack of revenue to the city gov. But, it will pass. Hopefully with a smaller, more efficient and 'open minded' local govt.

And, when I've had enough, its an eight minute ride to the GGB and I am heading out of dodge!

YRMV

This is a fair take. I DO work in tech, but not for any company that would pop into someone's head, and I REALLY don't think "tech bros" are to blame for much of anything that's wrong with this city. I DO think that "tech" was a great scapegoat for the city's problems until companies and workers started to leave, and now all that's left is the real issue, which is utterly incompetent and grifting local government. At the end of the day, like you said, it's a cycle, and SF won't ever become Detroit; however, the citizens need to hold local officials accountable for making the city a place that folks want to live/work/vacation in.

edit: For those of you not in this area, the vast majority of what you think of as "tech" and "tech workers" exists much further south, nearer San Jose and it's bedroom communities - roughly 50 miles away.

[cgolvin]

Originally Posted by XXtwindad

Are driverless cars any worse than distracted drivers looking at their cell phones? I’m guessing not.

Veering OT, but this is an interesting question. Most of the reported failures of driverless cars are poor exception handling -- a scenario outside of the software's training arises and its resultant action is problematic. Humans, that is, humans who are paying attention to their driving, generally make better choices in these exception cases.

However, driverless cars not only don't do what phone-distracted drivers do, they also (generally) don't do a lot of dangerous things that non-distracted drivers do, like speed, run red lights, drive aggressively, etc. So, while you may be right that it's a wash today, I think it's clear that the software in driverless cars will continue to improve and be trained on more exceptions, whereas people will just keep looking at their phones, so in the long term driverless cars are better/safer.

[EB]

Originally Posted by dustyrider

It sort of feels like someone should be sending the author a picture of an old man yelling at a cloud in the sky.

That would certainly be an ironic thing to do, since Ms. Solnit literally invented the verb "to mansplain"

[sfo1]

Your lame Uber or Lyft driver are no better than driver-less, and would agree they are worse. The drivers (IMO) are from out of the area and have zero knowledge of how to get from point A to point B w/out Google Maps. In fact, their route/fare is generated in part by the maps. They are driving - looking at their phone to see the maps - not vaguely aware of 'where' they are - and distracted.

Driverless uses the same route/map and although overly cautious for my liking, is safer.

Maybe seven years ago and before you could get an Uber / Lyft and tell them the proper route to take (again, the driver has no idea where he is at or going). Now, they pretty much have to stick to the map.

YRMV

Originally Posted by cgolvin

However, driverless cars not only don't do what phone-distracted drivers do, they also (generally) don't do a lot of dangerous things that non-distracted drivers do, like speed, run red lights, drive aggressively, etc. So, while you may be right that it's a wash today, I think it's clear that the software in driverless cars will continue to improve and be trained on more exceptions, whereas people will just keep looking at their phones, so in the long term driverless cars are better/safer.

[72gmc]

Thanks for sharing that. I appreciate that she’s describing a scenario that affects a city she loves, and also affects other cities just because they are cities. This sentence…

“But they never really loved San Francisco, at least not as a place of diversity and free circulation, and they’ve never acknowledged their role in its dramatic economic divides, housing crises and desperate homeless population“

…could apply to any number of cities at different times. The leading technology of the moment disrupts the status quo, those who control it amass wealth, and usually they view their wealth and privilege as an unalloyed good that’s under attack from the very city that made it possible.

[Davist]

aging hippy lamenting about something that never was.. well that's cold, but I certainly don't think "capitalism" or "tech" is to blame for SFs ills. I had SF as part of a sales territory in the mid 90s-00s and spent plenty of time there (lived in the East bay then was in weekly, and plenty of recreation there) even then it didn't seem to be what I hoped it would be, but I took it for what it was. Went back this past spring (went back about every month pre covid) and thought the media stories (when aren't they) were definitely overblown had a fine time walking around. Northbeach is still fun, Chinatown didn't disappoint, etc.

[reuben]

San Francisco went downhill after they declared war on groceries, around 1999 or so.