9 ms·
Differences between San Francisco and London (2014)
- pmoriarty 10y ago"San Francisco contains a large number of start-ups with small teams where employees feel like they can have greater impact. Many people found their own businesses to pursue their passions or are part of larger teams working on causes they relate to. This leads to a culture of creating impact on others and of doing something that’s has wider benefit than to just oneself." This is more startup and corporate hype than reality. Many startups pretend to set out to change the world to get funding, try to motivate their employees, and get good PR. The media is often eager to be fooled and jump on any bandwagon if there's a story in it, but people who've been in the industry a while and aren't wet behind the ears have heard such hype repeatedly, and it gets really old after a while, and is not very convincing. Most people, whether in SF or anywhere else in the world, work because they get paid. Sure, it's nice to work on what you love, but relatively few people achieve that dream in the long run. Much more common is burnout and disillusionment, not just in tech but in many other careers as well. It often looks rosy and beautiful when you're fresh out of college, but gets less rosy with each passing year, unless you happen to win the startup lottery and have fuck-you money to really work on whatever you want whenver you want, or not, as the mood strikes you. Otherwise, it's mostly work, not play, and certainly not saving the world.
- olivermarks 10y agoThere are also an alarmingly large number of Trustafarians in San Francisco who are playing at 'being in a start up' rather than admitting they are just dossing about on a trust fund...
- twblalock 10y agoDo you have any evidence to support this assertion, or are you just making baseless insults?
- olivermarks 10y agoI've lived in the bay area for 25 years, I'm in the tech world and I've been around the block a few times...
- to3m 10y agoDo you have any evidence that it isn't true? :) A wealthy family, if you have one, would be an excellent source of money for a startup. It's sometimes hard to tell which bits are for real, and which bits are the play-acting, but I've long suspected anyway that more people than you'd think are playing startup. Does it matter if it's with somebody else's money rather than their own? I say no... but of course if your story fits the rags-to-riches American Dream then this can help ennoble what would otherwise be a straightforward tale of simple money-grabbing.
- CM30 10y agoThere seem to be a rather large number of those people in London too. Though in their cases, it's often more playing at 'running a company' in general rather than a startup.
- nailer 10y agoOne stellar example: http://uk.businessinsider.com/how-fling-social-media-app-died-2016-11?r=US&IR=T http://uk.businessinsider.com/how-fling-social-media-app-die...
- et-al 10y agoKeep in mind this was written in early 2014. Mike Judge's Silicon Valley would come out a few months later. * cough * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXuFrtmOYKg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXuFrtmOYKg
- pmoriarty 10y agoThis crap has been going on for a very, very long time. The Dilbert comic strip started in 1989. The first Internet bubble burst way back in 2001. Everything parodied in Silicon Valley was as bad or even worse back then, and earlier. The real Silicon Valley is a parody of itself.
- et-al 10y agoYup. To clarify, I was pointing out that the author may not have been aware of the hubris of "making the world a better place" or how little meaning it holds for those that have been here for a while. I think if he were to read this now, he'd agree a lot of it is bullshit.
- erdojo 10y agoWholeheartedly agree - except with the start-p lottery/F-U money. What most startup employees don't understand that even if their start-up wins the lottery, they're not going to have F-U money. That's reserved for co-founders and investors. Maaaaaybbeeee if you're employee 1-20 at the next Facebook or Google you'll end up with a substantial sum. But the rest of the pack? You're .1% (if you're lucky) might next you $500-100k. Not enough to brag about. If you have .1% and your company sells for $100 million, you don't get .1% of $100M. You get .1% of whatever's left over after the investors have gotten their 2-3x preferences, all debts have been settled etc.
- adwhit 10y agoLondon is far too diverse for this comparison to make sense. It has ten times the population of San Francisco. If you think London is a particular way, it is probably because the bit of London you are in is that way.
- objclxt 10y ago> If you think London is a particular way, it is probably because the bit of London you are in is that way. Not just London. Take this quote from the original article: > In San Francisco the predominant ways people make money is through selling or floating their startup - it’s about working hard and living frugally whilst working with your team For want of a better word, that's BS. Firstly that pre-supposes everyone working in tech in SF is in a position where they'd make money off their startup selling or floating (many startup employees aren't, and even then as a profitable exit is the exception, not the norm. Secondly, it discounts everyone quietly making significant amounts of money plugging away at a sizable tech company milking the RSUs over time (and that's a lot of people). I've lived in both cities, my experiences have been completely different.
- quicklime 10y agoThe population of San Francisco proper is only ~800k but the population of the Bay Area as a whole is about 7 million people, which is only slightly less than Greater London's 8 million.
- chillaxtian 10y agowhat a vapid predictable piece of self aggrandization.
- Apocryphon 10y agohow so
- geodel 10y agoLooks more of a "This is the bus/train route I used to take and these are types of folks, places I saw." Very simplistic view of both cities.
- exergy 10y agoCurious, but what else would you have it be? A detailed, scientific comparison of jobs, club memberships, languages spoken, schools attended...Academic to the point of tedious? I thought the whole point of a blog was personal experience? This is what the author saw and therefore, this is what he can express with honesty.
- kabes 10y agoLike others are saying (and actually the article also mentions), it's a very subjective view. I've also lived in both cities and had quite different experiences. To me, SF/bay area felt more like a rat race and my friends had a better work/social balance in London (note that I didn't work in finance). And while it might look like in SF are "working on causes they relate to." To me it feels more like people in SF find they have to be on some sort of mission. Just having a job you like isn't good enough. You need to change the world.
- harry-wood 10y agoFunny how it ends with "my very individual perspective (I worked in London as a management consultant whereas in SF I worked with a startup)" ...which was entirely obvious throughout the whole piece.
- JamilD 10y agoI hear a lot of complaints about SF being too tech-centric and monocultural. This is only true if you segregate yourself from the SF natives and the vibrant, diverse community that's existed before the tech booms and busts of the past two decades. It's easy to feel like it's just a tech bubble -- there's not much interaction outside of it. But if you make an effort to step outside the tech-centric environment, it can be extremely rewarding.
- bogomipz 10y ago>"But if you make an effort to step outside the tech-centric environment, it can be extremely rewarding." Can you give an example?
- pmoriarty 10y agoWho has time for that? Seems everyone in tech is burning the midnight oil to get the next MVP out, and have forgotten that life outside of work exists. Many companies also encourage navel gazing by providing "free" lunches, team outings, tech-meetups, company happy hours and parties, and other ways of remaining pretty much in the company and tech social scene. If you're young and somehow didn't buy in to the many enticements to work every waking moment, you might have time to socialize with people outside of tech (if you were interested enough to do so, and actually made an effort to move out of your comfort zone). If you're older, you are likely to want to spend your few precious hours outside of work with your family, and maybe if you're very lucky, with a few friends, who are probably also in the tech field. Also, don't forget that many people in tech are famously introverted and socially phobic. Getting them to socialize at all, much less go out of their comfort zone and meet people unlike them is a challenge.
- greglindahl 10y agoAlmost everyone I know in tech in the Bay Area isn't like you describe... some of those things are true about some folks, but on the whole, most tech workers are not stuck in the tech community bubble.
- DrScump 10y ago
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- jongold 10y agoI lived in London for almost 3 decades; this is exactly why I moved to San Francisco
- teen 10y ago> Many of the wealthy in San Francisco are newly rich, directly from their own work in building a business. Many of these businesses are public or run professionally and so there is less space for heirs and, with the continuing fast pace of technological change, plenty of space for new entrants - meritocracy, not connections are key. Uhh not sure what SF you're living in
- twblalock 10y agoI grew up in the San Francisco area, and I know a lot of people who are a much closer match to what the article describes as London-type people: they work for large, established companies for a regular paycheck, they have been here a long time, they are embedded in local professional networks, etc. Some of them even have to wear suits to work! I guess the author never heard of the established, large companies in the semiconductor and software industries that supply the majority of jobs here, not to mention health care, finance, etc. It's not all startups. This is the funniest part of the article: > San Francisco is 6 hours away from the US East Coast and even further from Europe and Asia. This leaves it a little isolated and less connected to other parts of the world. A noticeable consequence of this is that people seem to be less aware of, interested in and knowledgeable about world affairs. The proportion of foreign-born people is higher in the San Francisco area than anywhere else in the United States with the possible exception of New York City. The San Francisco area is far more international than the author gives it credit for. By the way, we are closer to Asia both geographically and culturally than the East Coast is. This article does nothing but repeat stereotypes, and it contains no original ideas.
- JDiculous 10y agoI've never lived in SF or Europe, but as an American who's lived in the suburbs of DC and now NYC, it seems to me that Americans in general are less internationally conscious than Europeans. Most Europeans I know speak 3+ languages, have studied and lived abroad, and have traveled extensively. Americans in my experience tend to be more insular and less cultured. And it makes sense because Europe has so many different countries clustered together, traveling between them is cheap and easy, and they get 4+ weeks vacation.
- known 10y agoA country is not made of land; a country is made of its people;
- lotusko 10y agosome opinion like the east and the west
- tensor 10y agoMy view of San Francisco culture as an outsider is actually quite negative now. For years I thought it was a culture very in line with my own, but after years of watching and interacting remotely with people from that scene my mind has changed. I now feel it's largely dominated by arrogance. Everyone wants to "change the world" but what they really want is fame and fortune. A San Francisco startup is hilariously not practical. The article cites working hard and living frugally, but startup culture is the opposite. It's ludicrous extremes like having pingpong tables and games and coffee baristas at work. This is not living "frugally." Worse though, is the idea that everyone is a temporarily embarrassed Steve Jobs who is good at everything, even the things they are completely ignorant of. The disdain for areas they have no expertise in is astonishing. Meanwhile, the engine fuelling all this, the VCs, have their own agenda, namely themselves. They feed the culture because it benefits them. Most will fail, most people are not Steve Jobs. But the VCs just need one or two successes to make it worth it. It's in their interest to have every possible upcoming company under their thumb. The VCs message is always clear: you won't make it without them. You won't make it without being in Silicon Valley. It's impossible. It's all very off putting and not at all like the glittering fake picture that the SV culture likes to paint.
- hueving 10y ago>It's ludicrous extremes like having pingpong tables and games and coffee baristas at work. This is not living "frugally." If a pingpong table and games are a major expense in your company, you're already dead. A barista is wasteful, unless he/she is serving coffee to hundreds of employees that would otherwise waste company time by leaving the office for a coffee break. As an engineer, I avoid companies like the plague that refuse basic niceties in the name of saving money. It's a major indicator that it's going to be a miserable environment and you will have to fight tooth-and-nail for every piece of equipment and (even worse) raises/promotions.
- adrianratnapala 10y agoHmm, I work for Google now, and they are the first company I have worked for with either baristas[1] or ping-pong tables. These are definitely luxurious perks and not "basic niceties". But Google is not a frugal startup. It's a giant company offering a big complicated benefits package. [1] Free ones that is. Not counting big plants with cafes that charge market prices and seem to break even.
- petegrif 10y agoI have lived in both for years. IMHO this is a shallow comparison indeed. Not to be relied upon.
- kriro 10y agoHere's a comment of a surprised San Francisco traveler that sums up the city for me: "I was rather surprised that there were so many homeless people. You'd think the supposed tech center of the world would be...you know...civilized and able to protect the weakest members of society better."
- nailer 10y agoSF is by far the dirtiest first world city I've ever been in - significantly fouler than the outskirts of Naples, as uncollected garbage is less rank than SF's human faeces.
- inopinatus 10y agoI was born in London, I've lived and worked in London, I've returned many times since to visit family and friends. I recognise the life choices and cultural norms presented here as only a small fraction of my experience of modern day Londoners. I don't know SFO but I suspect the author has a similarly narrow perspective there.
- dfraser992 10y agoI was in the Bay area during the first bubble, so that's my basis for my comments. An anthropologist I knew described the Bay area as a place where 'adolescents go to retire', which made a bunch of sense. A sense of the 60s was still around, with the general wackiness and Folsom Street Fair and the alt-cultures around. The tech scene was merely the latest incarnation of the gold-rush mentality. But now, given everything I have read about the Bay these days, I don't think I'd want to live there. Apparently all the artists have left, Burning Man is a corporate event soon to be shut down permanently (given what I've heard about the cops), money, money, money... too much wanna be zillionaires all hoping to best buds with Zuckerberg someday. IT culture is not what is was 'back in the day'. And get off my lawn! And I have lived in London for seven years, more than I did in SF. I greatly prefer London. Good public transport, it feels like a place you can live, it's a real city, not a bunch of suburbs (but now the rents... well, being used to SF rents when I moved, it was similar). My take on the article is the guy projects a lot onto the two cities. The tech scene has all these romantic associations with it and good lord, I am getting tired of hearing about them. At the end of the day, it just a job for most people and few startups actually matter (Uber matters because they are screwing up so much). "Changing the world" only equals working on social problems like establishing UBI, not running the world's largest BBS so your grandma can read fake news that is written in Romania or feeding the ADD of adolescents who like to take pictures of their food. As for financial, that will always matter until capitalism crashes.
- krystiangw 10y agoSan Francisco's climate is way better. But looks like theare are more programming jobs in London ( ~ 250 ) vs San Francisco ( ~ 140 ) https://jobsquery.it/jobs;page=1;tags=;sortBy=PUBLISHED_AT_DESC;query=;location=London%2C%20UK https://jobsquery.it/jobs;page=1;tags=;sortBy=PUBLISHED_AT_D... VS https://jobsquery.it/jobs;page=1;tags=;sortBy=PUBLISHED_AT_DESC;query=;location=San%20Francisco https://jobsquery.it/jobs;page=1;tags=;sortBy=PUBLISHED_AT_D...
- Wh1zz 10y agoLondon also has more than 10 times the population of SF...
- paulhallett 10y agoThis is almost the exact opposite view of the London I see.
- whatupmd 10y agoThis article is 2 years old and it shows. Comparing post-brexit London to San Francisco falls flat very quickly. Living in London is not living in Europe.
- woof 10y ago"Living in London is not living in Europe" Could you explain that sentence? Please.
- shanwang 10y agoAs a foreigner I have lived in London for more than a decade and have friends and families living in SF. One interesting I found is although both London and SF have large number of foreigners/immigrants, in London not one group of immigrants have dominant majority and deep roots in the city. Immigrants usually live scattered around the boroughs, this I think makes London more diverse than many US cities. Because new comers will have to interact with people of other background and try to fit the culture of where they are living.
- leovonl 10y agoHow can one compare UK and US and say the later has better social mobility? Ever heard of NHS (1) or council housing? Have you compared tuition fees on both countries? While I mostly understand the different atmosphere on both places, and even agree with some of the points, I have to say the author had to be pretty immersed in a very particular bubble to have come to this conclusion - which does not seem to fit reality as all. (1) Yes, NHS has its problems, but US simply does not have anything like it.
- 2dvisio 10y agoLuckily the comments are much better than this biased piece of blog post. Lived in both places. Loved only one. Won't tell you which one.