Tech Nightmares: Ghostline the flux

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Tech Nightmares: Ghostline the flux

How many quarters after Q1 2016 till Marissa Mayer is unemployed?
	1 or fewer
	2
	4
	Her job is guaranteed; what are you even talking about?

suck my woke dick: Oct 10, 2012; I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!

Put this cum-loving slave on ignore immediately!

bullet3 posted:

Ya, great idea. Let's drive out all the tech companies keeping the city afloat and let SF complete it's transformation into a 3rd world slum.

Not to mention it's a pointless idea anyway, as has been mentioned, that 150 million of housing revenue means gently caress all when there's nowhere in the city to build said housing, and no neighborhood will want it in its backyard.

So the takeaway here is SF needs some good old centralisation to poo poo on NIMBYs.

# ? Jul 2, 2016 23:02

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 18, 2024 13:11

cheese: Jan 7, 2004; Shop around for doctors! Always fucking shop for doctors. Doctors are stupid assholes. And they get by because people are cowed by their mystical bullshit quality of being able to maintain a 3.0 GPA at some Guatemalan medical college for 3 semesters. Find one that makes sense.

bullet3 posted:

Ya, great idea. Let's drive out all the tech companies keeping the city afloat and let SF complete it's transformation into a 3rd world slum.

Ya because Twitter and other tech companies which exist solely on VC funding and whose success is completely untethered from profit or revenue would DEFINITELY all leave SF, a location which acts as a significant selling point in the competition for the best tech talent, if they got hit with a modest payroll tax increase. Also, and this may come as a surprise to you, but SF has always had big areas of poor, working minority families - if anything it is becoming less like a 3rd world slum as the browner working class parts of SF are cleansed in a tide of gentrification money (aka The Mission).

# ? Jul 2, 2016 23:07

FilthyImp: Sep 30, 2002; Anime Deviant

bullet3 posted:

Ya, great idea. Let's drive out all the tech companies keeping the city afloat and let SF complete it's transformation into a 3rd world slum.

So we get rid of the tech bros and hipsters, and also reverse the gentrification tap?

Sounds good comrade.

# ? Jul 2, 2016 23:28

Pope Guilty: Nov 6, 2006; The human animal is a beautiful and terrible creature, capable of limitless compassion and unfathomable cruelty.

What kind of incredible reality bubble do you have to be living in to think that the tech industry is the only reason anybody wants to live in the Bay Area?

# ? Jul 2, 2016 23:32

cheese: Jan 7, 2004; Shop around for doctors! Always fucking shop for doctors. Doctors are stupid assholes. And they get by because people are cowed by their mystical bullshit quality of being able to maintain a 3.0 GPA at some Guatemalan medical college for 3 semesters. Find one that makes sense.

Pope Guilty posted:

What kind of incredible reality bubble do you have to be living in to think that the tech industry is the only reason anybody wants to live in the Bay Area?

Uhhh SF was just a barren waste land with nothing worthwhile in it before the tech money came, duh. No culture, no food, no entertainment, nothing! If Twitter left SF and moved down the peninsula, SF would sink back down into the abyss like a modern Atlantis.

# ? Jul 2, 2016 23:37

Munkeymon: Aug 14, 2003; Motherfucker's got an
armor-piercing crowbar! Rigoddamndicu𝜆ous.

bullet3 posted:

Not to mention it's a pointless idea anyway, as has been mentioned, that 150 million of housing revenue means gently caress all when there's nowhere in the city to build said housing, and no neighborhood will want it in its backyard.

This might sound kinda crazy but bear with me here: if you can pass a law to tax rich fuckers then you can also pass a law to ignore their whinging about their view getting ruined. Weird, right?

# ? Jul 3, 2016 00:15

ocrumsprug: Sep 23, 2010; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Munkeymon posted:

This might sound kinda crazy but bear with me here: if you can pass a law to tax rich fuckers then you can also pass a law to ignore their whinging about their view getting ruined. Weird, right?

I'm afraid you'll need to phrase it in terms of an app elevator pitch.

# ? Jul 3, 2016 00:22

bullet3: Nov 8, 2011

I'll believe it when I see it. Nothing would make me happier than removing all height restrictions in SF and building tons of housing across the city, fixing the underlying supply problem and making the city livable again for non-millionaires, but I don't see it happening. Instead they'll keep scapegoating tech companies with token measures like this one that won't actually make a meaningful difference to prices.

# ? Jul 3, 2016 00:23

Coolness Averted: Feb 20, 2007; oh don't worry, I can't smell asparagus piss, it's in my DNA

GO HOGG WILD!
🐗🐗🐗🐗🐗

bullet3 posted:

I'll believe it when I see it. Nothing would make me happier than removing all height restrictions in SF and building tons of housing across the city, fixing the underlying supply problem and making the city livable again for non-millionaires, but I don't see it happening. Instead they'll keep scapegoating tech companies with token measures like this one that won't actually make a meaningful difference to prices.

Will it drive off the tech companies or is it a do nothing token effort?
Because if it doesn't drive off tech or change the housing market I think we agree there isn't any downside to this tax that creates some money for housing the homeless, friend

# ? Jul 3, 2016 00:52

ShadowHawk: Jun 25, 2000; CERTIFIED PRE OWNED TESLA OWNER

Munkeymon posted:

This might sound kinda crazy but bear with me here: if you can pass a law to tax rich fuckers then you can also pass a law to ignore their whinging about their view getting ruined. Weird, right?

No you see the problem is companies that pay their workers too much and not at all the landed gentry extracting the highest rents in the nation

# ? Jul 3, 2016 00:54

cheese: Jan 7, 2004; Shop around for doctors! Always fucking shop for doctors. Doctors are stupid assholes. And they get by because people are cowed by their mystical bullshit quality of being able to maintain a 3.0 GPA at some Guatemalan medical college for 3 semesters. Find one that makes sense.

ShadowHawk posted:

No you see the problem is companies that pay their workers too much and not at all the landed gentry extracting the highest rents in the nation

I mean, a city's housing situation can be poo poo for multiple reasons that reinforce one another.

# ? Jul 3, 2016 01:13

silence_kit: Jul 14, 2011; by the sex ghost

ShadowHawk posted:

No you see the problem is companies that pay their workers too much and not at all the landed gentry extracting the highest rents in the nation

Again, this thread is bizarro D&D: in the rest of this forum, the party line is that millennials have been dealt a bad hand, deserve to have more economic opportunities, etc. etc., however in this thread, young techie millennials are literal villains for making too much money and for spending huge fractions of their salaries on rental housing in one of the most desirable areas in the US. Also, in this thread, the start-up companies that they work for are bad because they aren't profitable. This is to be contrasted with the party line in all of the other threads in this forum. If you were to read the rest of D&D, you'd learn that profit is bad and profitable companies are evil. Everything is upside down in this thread.

silence_kit fucked around with this message at 02:01 on Jul 3, 2016

# ? Jul 3, 2016 01:57

Samog: Dec 13, 2006; At least I'm not an 07.

the debate and discussion hivemind meme

# ? Jul 3, 2016 02:16

Absurd Alhazred: Mar 27, 2010; by Athanatos

If you would be so kind as to drop the forums meta-commentary, please?

# ? Jul 3, 2016 02:20

Liquid Communism: Mar 9, 2004; коммунизм хранится в яичках

silence_kit posted:

Again, this thread is bizarro D&D: in the rest of this forum, the party line is that millennials have been dealt a bad hand, deserve to have more economic opportunities, etc. etc., however in this thread, young techie millennials are literal villains for making too much money and for spending huge fractions of their salaries on rental housing in one of the most desirable areas in the US. Also, in this thread, the start-up companies that they work for are bad because they aren't profitable. This is to be contrasted with the party line in all of the other threads in this forum. If you were to read the rest of D&D, you'd learn that profit is bad and profitable companies are evil. Everything is upside down in this thread.

Did you have a point, or were you just here to whine? I mean, it's almost like different situations demand different reactions and a single wold-view that fits in a ten word meme isn't a universal truth!

# ? Jul 3, 2016 03:26

archangelwar: Oct 28, 2004; Teaching Moments

Yes these giant tech companies will pick up and move their headquarters over a minuscule tax as that is literally the only reason they are located in that area and nothing else. I hear they are already scoping out Tupelo, MS as the next destination due to the sweet 20 year tax deals the state has been cutting.

# ? Jul 3, 2016 04:42

silence_kit: Jul 14, 2011; by the sex ghost

archangelwar posted:

Yes these giant tech companies will pick up and move their headquarters over a minuscule tax as that is literally the only reason they are located in that area and nothing else. I hear they are already scoping out Tupelo, MS as the next destination due to the sweet 20 year tax deals the state has been cutting.

They could just move their headquarters out of SF and to one of the many other cities in the Bay Area. Most tech companies in the Bay Area aren't headquartered in SF anyway.

I have been told that Berkeley, CA, despite being a pretty nice place to live and the home of a pretty prestigious university with a good engineering school, isn't really home to a lot of technology companies because its taxes on businesses are much higher than nearby cities. A lot of small companies started by Berkeley professors do set up shop there since it is convenient, but later move elsewhere in the Bay Area to avoid paying the Berkeley taxes if their company makes it and actually starts making money.

silence_kit fucked around with this message at 05:00 on Jul 3, 2016

# ? Jul 3, 2016 04:58

ocrumsprug: Sep 23, 2010; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

silence_kit posted:

They could just move their headquarters out of SF and to one of the many other cities in the Bay Area. Most tech companies in the Bay Area aren't headquartered in SF anyway.

I have been told that Berkeley, CA, despite being a pretty nice place to live and the home of a pretty prestigious university with a good engineering school, isn't really home to a lot of technology companies because its taxes on businesses are much higher than nearby cities. A lot of small companies started by Berkeley professors do set up shop there since it is convenient, but later move elsewhere in the Bay Area to avoid paying the Berkeley taxes if their company makes it and actually starts making money.

Sounds like it is accomplishing exactly what it is intended to accomplish.

# ? Jul 3, 2016 05:17

i am harry: Oct 14, 2003

cheese posted:

Ya because Twitter and other tech companies which exist solely on VC funding and whose success is completely untethered from profit or revenue would DEFINITELY all leave SF

Denver isn't too far.

# ? Jul 3, 2016 05:17

archangelwar: Oct 28, 2004; Teaching Moments

silence_kit posted:

They could just move their headquarters out of SF and to one of the many other cities in the Bay Area. Most tech companies in the Bay Area aren't headquartered in SF anyway.

I have been told that Berkeley, CA, despite being a pretty nice place to live and the home of a pretty prestigious university with a good engineering school, isn't really home to a lot of technology companies because its taxes on businesses are much higher than nearby cities. A lot of small companies started by Berkeley professors do set up shop there since it is convenient, but later move elsewhere in the Bay Area to avoid paying the Berkeley taxes if their company makes it and actually starts making money.

Yeah, they could just abandon the offices that cost them 10+ years worth of this tax and move them to any old part of the bay area like Palo Alto or Mountain View, since location is unimportant.

You are right, many of the companies on the list are not headquartered in SF proper.

# ? Jul 3, 2016 05:19

silence_kit: Jul 14, 2011; by the sex ghost

ocrumsprug posted:

Sounds like it is accomplishing exactly what it is intended to accomplish.

What, the Berkeley tax? Probably. Berkeley is a pretty NIMBY place.

If you are referring to the proposed SF tax, pushing tech companies out of SF proper and into a nearby municipality won't help lower rents in SF.

silence_kit fucked around with this message at 05:28 on Jul 3, 2016

# ? Jul 3, 2016 05:21

i say swears online: Mar 4, 2005

silence_kit posted:

They could just move their headquarters out of SF and to one of the many other cities in the Bay Area. Most tech companies in the Bay Area aren't headquartered in SF anyway.

I have been told that Berkeley, CA, despite being a pretty nice place to live and the home of a pretty prestigious university with a good engineering school, isn't really home to a lot of technology companies because its taxes on businesses are much higher than nearby cities. A lot of small companies started by Berkeley professors do set up shop there since it is convenient, but later move elsewhere in the Bay Area to avoid paying the Berkeley taxes if their company makes it and actually starts making money.

you make an extremely good point for area-wide collaboration between local governments. if everywhere from SF to Sacramento jacked poo poo sky high/guillotined the aristocracy/imposed a negligible property and payroll tax, companies would have less economic incentive in relocating to close locations and every municipality is better off than it was before

# ? Jul 3, 2016 07:26

i say swears online: Mar 4, 2005

of course, the slippery slope is just to have the federal government mandate this sort of stuff

so :getin:

# ? Jul 3, 2016 07:28

cheese: Jan 7, 2004; Shop around for doctors! Always fucking shop for doctors. Doctors are stupid assholes. And they get by because people are cowed by their mystical bullshit quality of being able to maintain a 3.0 GPA at some Guatemalan medical college for 3 semesters. Find one that makes sense.

silence_kit posted:

Again, this thread is bizarro D&D: in the rest of this forum, the party line is that millennials have been dealt a bad hand, deserve to have more economic opportunities, etc. etc., however in this thread, young techie millennials are literal villains for making too much money and for spending huge fractions of their salaries on rental housing in one of the most desirable areas in the US.

I think maybe, just maybe, it has to do with the fact that the vast majority of of those "young techie millennials" making all that money are upper middle class white men with college degrees, often from prestigious schools? You know, the same people who have always done well?

silence_kit posted:

Also, in this thread, the start-up companies that they work for are bad because they aren't profitable. This is to be contrasted with the party line in all of the other threads in this forum. If you were to read the rest of D&D, you'd learn that profit is bad and profitable companies are evil. Everything is upside down in this thread.

What the hell are you talking about? I brought up profitability because so many tech companies, startups especially, are not connected to the usual "profit=life" model thanks to huge VC investment funding their operations in the hopes that they will be the next Facebook. You have completely misunderstood my point, which is that tech companies can probably absorb tax increases more effectively than more traditional companies.

silence_kit posted:

They could just move their headquarters out of SF and to one of the many other cities in the Bay Area. Most tech companies in the Bay Area aren't headquartered in SF anyway.

I have been told that Berkeley, CA, despite being a pretty nice place to live and the home of a pretty prestigious university with a good engineering school, isn't really home to a lot of technology companies because its taxes on businesses are much higher than nearby cities. A lot of small companies started by Berkeley professors do set up shop there since it is convenient, but later move elsewhere in the Bay Area to avoid paying the Berkeley taxes if their company makes it and actually starts making money.

I would love to see some evidence that companies that begin in Berkeley leave for SF and the peninsula because of tax costs. Assuming Berkeley actually does create many small companies, my guess is that they move out of Berkeley because it is a horrible place to run a company from. There is no room for anything, it doesn't have the allure of SF and if you think SF has NIMBY tendancies, hoooooy boy! I have a really hard time believing that Berkeley has some special tax that is the crippling difference between life and death for startups.

Aliquid posted:

you make an extremely good point for area-wide collaboration between local governments. if everywhere from SF to Sacramento jacked poo poo sky high/guillotined the aristocracy/imposed a negligible property and payroll tax, companies would have less economic incentive in relocating to close locations and every municipality is better off than it was before

Its why the "right to work" state thing is such garbage. Its a race to the bottom with people outbidding each other to pull in less tax revenue when a concerted nation/regionwide effort would keep the constant relocation from happening.

# ? Jul 3, 2016 17:00

Arglebargle III: Feb 21, 2006

Don't forget churn that has nothing to do with productivity.

# ? Jul 3, 2016 17:08

Wheany: Mar 17, 2006; Spinya^{ha^{ha^haha}ha}ha_{ha_{ha_haha}ha}ha!; Doctor Rope

ocrumsprug posted:

I'm afraid you'll need to phrase it in terms of an app elevator pitch.

Hmm. Okay, how's this:

A mobile app to

Munkeymon posted:

pass a law to tax rich fuckers [and] then [to] also pass a law to ignore their whinging about their view getting ruined.

# ? Jul 4, 2016 16:01

FilthyImp: Sep 30, 2002; Anime Deviant

Wheany posted:

Hmm. Okay, how's this:

A mobile app to...

Better, but you still need a catchy name that either drops a vowel or is based on some geeky gently caress poo poo.

Like "Tithr"

Or "Unto Caeser"

Or "Silmarilleo"

# ? Jul 4, 2016 21:36

i say swears online: Mar 4, 2005

my new app Geotine uses google earth and zillow to help find the most affluent of targets

# ? Jul 4, 2016 21:38

Josh Lyman: May 24, 2009

Absurd Alhazred posted:

This is some America's Army level bullshit.

Wasn't America's Army a decent game though?

# ? Jul 4, 2016 23:07

FilthyImp: Sep 30, 2002; Anime Deviant

Josh Lyman posted:

Wasn't America's Army a decent game though?

It had solid foundations for a TactiLOL pre-Modern Warfare affair.

It's quite sobering when a US Military recruitment tool is more in shape than something like Alien:Colonial Marines

# ? Jul 5, 2016 00:45

ToxicSlurpee: Nov 5, 2003; -=SEND HELP=-; Pillbug

Josh Lyman posted:

Wasn't America's Army a decent game though?

It was also actually quite popular for a while to. I still have a few install discs somewhere that I never actually used. It was also briefly a good recruiting tool too from what I remember.

The, well...Bush.

# ? Jul 5, 2016 02:06

Samog: Dec 13, 2006; At least I'm not an 07.

FilthyImp posted:

Better, but you still need a catchy name that either drops a vowel or is based on some geeky gently caress poo poo.

Like "Tithr"

Or "Unto Caeser"

Or "Silmarilleo"

natlrazr

# ? Jul 5, 2016 03:08

ComradeCosmobot: Dec 4, 2004; USPOL July

Theranos Status: Still hosed.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 07:54

actionjackson: Jan 12, 2003

ComradeCosmobot posted:

Theranos Status: Still hosed.

As someone who works in medical research this is especially amusing to me. Also any fuckery in relation to Warfarin is especially egregious.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 18:41

snyprmag: Oct 9, 2005

silence_kit posted:

They could just move their headquarters out of SF and to one of the many other cities in the Bay Area. Most tech companies in the Bay Area aren't headquartered in SF anyway.

I have been told that Berkeley, CA, despite being a pretty nice place to live and the home of a pretty prestigious university with a good engineering school, isn't really home to a lot of technology companies because its taxes on businesses are much higher than nearby cities. A lot of small companies started by Berkeley professors do set up shop there since it is convenient, but later move elsewhere in the Bay Area to avoid paying the Berkeley taxes if their company makes it and actually starts making money.

In addition to the other points, the bay area is pretty much built around SF, especially the public transit that lots of workers take. Commuting from the east bay to the peninsula or vis-versa is terrible, but SF is doable from either.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 19:04

MickeyFinn: May 8, 2007; Biggie Smalls and Junior Mafia some mark ass bitches

actionjackson posted:

As someone who works in medical research this is especially amusing to me. Also any fuckery in relation to Warfarin is especially egregious.

Whenever I hear about Theranos I think of this song. The total inability to understand the complexities of everything involved from the science to the regulatory environment magnified by hubris makes the whole enterprise look like a way for a rich person to demonstrate self-diagnosed superiority.

# ? Jul 6, 2016 19:56