8 ms·

> The Economist is ignoring the fact that the city administration in San Francisco is now extremely busy, and I mean 24/7 busy, cracking down on electric scoote

by icey 8y ago

> The Economist is ignoring the fact that the city administration in San Francisco is now extremely busy, and I mean 24/7 busy, cracking down on electric scooters that - unlike needles, human excrements, tents and substance abuse - are a real problem that needs a resolution ASAP. Don't discount the virtue signaling that's going on here. It's an election year, and tech is still a reasonably good whipping boy for voters. Of all my friends, the non-tech ones seem much more likely to vote than the tech ones. Many of my tech friends in SF aren't even registered to vote here.

dvtrn 8y ago
Of all my friends, the non-tech ones seem much more likely to vote than the tech ones Interesting. I realize I'm asking you to spitball, and that's fine legitimately curious to hear something outside the box but why do you think that is? Seems to me an unlikely division when it comes to voter participation, or at least a very unexpected one.
- icey 8y ago
  I'm not sure, but it's been a little surprising to me as well. For the past month any time I've had a conversation with someone who had an opinion about politics and policies in SF, I've asked them if they have voted yet, or if they're going to vote; and while nearly everyone has had an opinion, only two people in tech out of probably two dozen have said yes. Of the remaining lot, a bunch have said they never registered to vote for a variety of reasons ("I forgot to", "Oh, I need to do that sometime", "I don't want my information getting sold", "I still don't have a California driver's license", etc). On the other hand, friends not in tech (much more varied population by job; artists, food-service & bar industry, construction, medical) were much more motivated to tell me not only what their opinions were, but how they were voting (or had already voted) and why. It's possible that this will change nearer to the mid-term, but it doesn't seem like primary elections get people that excited. It's a great question though, and I'll start asking more deeply about it because I'm curious now as well!
  - dvtrn 8y ago
    Anecdote time: Last night I stumbled by a group of older (than me, all clearly retired) folks talking about Unions at my local pub. Interested, I sat down and quietly listened in-they didn't seem to mind. At one point though I spoke up about how surprised I was that we haven't seen more tech workers unionizing in areas that aren't San Francisco, Cupertino or Austin. The "leader" of the pack so to speak,went on to talk about all of the amenities tech giants offer like day cares and dog parks on campus, laundry facilities etc and then he capped it off with "but none of that stuff pays your rent in San Fran". Bringing it all back around, I do genuinely think about this sort of stuff a lot and I wonder if there's something to be said of a tech culture that gives it's employees so much that they passively lose something that binds us all to the connective tissue of citizen engagement. I only bring it up because I've noticed the exact same phenomenon you have: lots of very smart, well paid tech friends who confessed to not even bothering to vote despite very huge opinions about everything political and an even larger eagerness to display their "wokeness" on social media. It's my poorer blue collar and service industry friends I see online asking for rides to the polls, and are the ones who ask ME "did you vote today?"
  - Karrot_Kream 8y ago
    > I'm not sure, but it's been a little surprising to me as well. When you have the income to: 1. Rent a comfortable apartment pretty much anywhere in the Bay Area, without fear of rising rent displacing you. (Keep rent within a third of your income) 2. Pay for a private solution (Rideshare, Private commuter buses, tech company shuttle) to the broken transportation infrastructure, dirty streets, and the homeless problem of the Bay. 3. Have a fiscal safety net in case something happens to your income. 4. Have the insurance needed to withstand the occasional curve-balls of life. then you've mostly averted the endemic problems of the Bay Area. SF's gov't is incompetent, and private solutions have alleviated most of its systemic issues for its moneyed classes. Of course people in tech won't be as motivated to vote, they're insulated from all of the problems. There's a growing sentiment (growing being an understatement, Google/Apple buses have been smashed/blocked for years now) that tech's private market solutions are priced to only help their own out. Until this perception changes, they're going to want to vote with their rage.
- xenadu02 8y ago
  It is very easy to register to vote. You don't need a CA driver's license. Go here: http://registertovote.ca.gov/ http://registertovote.ca.gov/ They will mail you a confirmation of registration. Once you receive that confirmation convert yourself to a permanent vote-by-mail voter. -- San Francisco Permanent Vote By Mail: 1. Go here: http://sfelections.org/tools/regupdate/regupd.php http://sfelections.org/tools/regupdate/regupd.php 2. Enter your details, then check the "Become a permanent vote-by-mail voter" checkbox. 3. Click Print, then Save to PDF. Attach your signature electronically (or print it, sign it, and scan it with your phone) 4. Email the PDF to SFVote@sfgov.org -- San Jose Permanent Vote By Mail: 1. Go here: https://www.sccgov.org/sites/rov/VBM/Pages/Permanent.aspx https://www.sccgov.org/sites/rov/VBM/Pages/Permanent.aspx 2. Print the form and fill it out 3. Mail it to the address indicated -- San Mateo Permanent Vote By Mail: https://www.smcacre.org/vote-mail https://www.smcacre.org/vote-mail -- Now you're set. They will mail you a ballot in the mail for every election. You mark the cards, put them in the envelope, and drop them in the mail. You usually have ~3 weeks to research each proposition and candidate. If you live in a different county you'll have to check with them how to become a permanent vote-by-mail voter, or use the state form and mail it to your county registrar: http://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov//vote-by-mail/pdf/vote-by-mail-application.pdf http://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov//vote-by-mail/pdf/vote-by-ma...
- jdietrich 8y ago
  On the micro level, voting is completely irrational. The chances of your individual vote deciding an election is usually incredibly low, so going to the polling booth has a very low RoI. In a practical sense, voting is just a bad use of your time. Anecdotally, it seems that tech people are far more likely to think in these terms. This micro-level rationality leads to a big problem on the macro level. People who see politics as a matter of principle aren't likely to be swayed by the low RoI of going to vote. They'll exercise their democratic rights, come hell or high water. You end up with an electorate that is disproportionately driven by principles and ideals rather than pragmatism.
dionidium 8y ago
> Many of my tech friends in SF aren't even registered to vote here. I'm a transplant to NYC and I'm generally pretty critical of complaints about transplants -- try living in a city nobody wants to move to and get back to me on which is worse -- but this does make me think hard about the ways in which the people who move to a new city for short-term opportunity might not care at all about its long-term viability.
debt 8y ago
“virtue signaling” Ew please refrain from echoing alt-right invented language here.
- dvtrn 8y ago
  The "alt-right" absolutely did not invent the phrase 'virtue signaling', though one could probably make a (shaky) argument that they're guilty of deploying it most uncharitably. I don't think this is the place for that discussion though.
  - AnimalMuppet 8y ago
    I also don't think this is the place for trying to shut down the conversation based on who is associated with a word or phrase used. If there's something wrong with it's use in this context, "debt" should make that case, rather than trying to police the language.
    - dvtrn 8y ago
      Agreed. I was struggling to find a way to state this as well but choose to shut up when words eluded me. Is the phrase "virtue signaling" sometimes deployed by people with shitty intent? Yes. That doesn't mean the phrase has no value at all and I think in the context used its usage above was perfectly apt. If one thinks otherwise they ought to articulate a counterpoint instead of expecting all discussion on the point to stop because of their own personal hangups with bad actors. Something something nuanced political debate is dead
      - AnimalMuppet 8y ago
        Nuanced political debate may not be dead, but it is certainly being shot at. This is the second time today I've seen someone trying to end a conversation on HN because they labeled a participant as "alt-right". (There was more justification in the other case - the participant may well have been an active alt-right leader - but someone wanted them to be shunned for their off-HN identity, not for what they said here. It's disturbing. Some people (and from what I'm seeing, it's people on the left) want to simply silence other people (on the right) rather than actually answer them. I guess it's less work that way, and maybe more satisfying as well. It's less productive, though - you miss a chance to convince the audience, and you miss a chance to persuade your opponent. You gain the chance to make the audience make sure they never say the "taboo" words in the future, though... but that's more of a totalitarian approach than a reasonable tactic for a free people.

by icey 8y ago

dvtrn 8y ago

Of all my friends, the non-tech ones seem much more likely to vote than the tech ones Interesting. I realize I'm asking you to spitball, and that's fine legitimately curious to hear something outside the box but why do you think that is? Seems to me an unlikely division when it comes to voter participation, or at least a very unexpected one.

icey 8y ago
I'm not sure, but it's been a little surprising to me as well. For the past month any time I've had a conversation with someone who had an opinion about politics and policies in SF, I've asked them if they have voted yet, or if they're going to vote; and while nearly everyone has had an opinion, only two people in tech out of probably two dozen have said yes. Of the remaining lot, a bunch have said they never registered to vote for a variety of reasons ("I forgot to", "Oh, I need to do that sometime", "I don't want my information getting sold", "I still don't have a California driver's license", etc). On the other hand, friends not in tech (much more varied population by job; artists, food-service & bar industry, construction, medical) were much more motivated to tell me not only what their opinions were, but how they were voting (or had already voted) and why. It's possible that this will change nearer to the mid-term, but it doesn't seem like primary elections get people that excited. It's a great question though, and I'll start asking more deeply about it because I'm curious now as well!
- dvtrn 8y ago
  Anecdote time: Last night I stumbled by a group of older (than me, all clearly retired) folks talking about Unions at my local pub. Interested, I sat down and quietly listened in-they didn't seem to mind. At one point though I spoke up about how surprised I was that we haven't seen more tech workers unionizing in areas that aren't San Francisco, Cupertino or Austin. The "leader" of the pack so to speak,went on to talk about all of the amenities tech giants offer like day cares and dog parks on campus, laundry facilities etc and then he capped it off with "but none of that stuff pays your rent in San Fran". Bringing it all back around, I do genuinely think about this sort of stuff a lot and I wonder if there's something to be said of a tech culture that gives it's employees so much that they passively lose something that binds us all to the connective tissue of citizen engagement. I only bring it up because I've noticed the exact same phenomenon you have: lots of very smart, well paid tech friends who confessed to not even bothering to vote despite very huge opinions about everything political and an even larger eagerness to display their "wokeness" on social media. It's my poorer blue collar and service industry friends I see online asking for rides to the polls, and are the ones who ask ME "did you vote today?"
- Karrot_Kream 8y ago
  > I'm not sure, but it's been a little surprising to me as well. When you have the income to: 1. Rent a comfortable apartment pretty much anywhere in the Bay Area, without fear of rising rent displacing you. (Keep rent within a third of your income) 2. Pay for a private solution (Rideshare, Private commuter buses, tech company shuttle) to the broken transportation infrastructure, dirty streets, and the homeless problem of the Bay. 3. Have a fiscal safety net in case something happens to your income. 4. Have the insurance needed to withstand the occasional curve-balls of life. then you've mostly averted the endemic problems of the Bay Area. SF's gov't is incompetent, and private solutions have alleviated most of its systemic issues for its moneyed classes. Of course people in tech won't be as motivated to vote, they're insulated from all of the problems. There's a growing sentiment (growing being an understatement, Google/Apple buses have been smashed/blocked for years now) that tech's private market solutions are priced to only help their own out. Until this perception changes, they're going to want to vote with their rage.
xenadu02 8y ago
It is very easy to register to vote. You don't need a CA driver's license. Go here: http://registertovote.ca.gov/ http://registertovote.ca.gov/ They will mail you a confirmation of registration. Once you receive that confirmation convert yourself to a permanent vote-by-mail voter. -- San Francisco Permanent Vote By Mail: 1. Go here: http://sfelections.org/tools/regupdate/regupd.php http://sfelections.org/tools/regupdate/regupd.php 2. Enter your details, then check the "Become a permanent vote-by-mail voter" checkbox. 3. Click Print, then Save to PDF. Attach your signature electronically (or print it, sign it, and scan it with your phone) 4. Email the PDF to SFVote@sfgov.org -- San Jose Permanent Vote By Mail: 1. Go here: https://www.sccgov.org/sites/rov/VBM/Pages/Permanent.aspx https://www.sccgov.org/sites/rov/VBM/Pages/Permanent.aspx 2. Print the form and fill it out 3. Mail it to the address indicated -- San Mateo Permanent Vote By Mail: https://www.smcacre.org/vote-mail https://www.smcacre.org/vote-mail -- Now you're set. They will mail you a ballot in the mail for every election. You mark the cards, put them in the envelope, and drop them in the mail. You usually have ~3 weeks to research each proposition and candidate. If you live in a different county you'll have to check with them how to become a permanent vote-by-mail voter, or use the state form and mail it to your county registrar: http://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov//vote-by-mail/pdf/vote-by-mail-application.pdf http://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov//vote-by-mail/pdf/vote-by-ma...
jdietrich 8y ago
On the micro level, voting is completely irrational. The chances of your individual vote deciding an election is usually incredibly low, so going to the polling booth has a very low RoI. In a practical sense, voting is just a bad use of your time. Anecdotally, it seems that tech people are far more likely to think in these terms. This micro-level rationality leads to a big problem on the macro level. People who see politics as a matter of principle aren't likely to be swayed by the low RoI of going to vote. They'll exercise their democratic rights, come hell or high water. You end up with an electorate that is disproportionately driven by principles and ideals rather than pragmatism.

dionidium 8y ago

> Many of my tech friends in SF aren't even registered to vote here. I'm a transplant to NYC and I'm generally pretty critical of complaints about transplants -- try living in a city nobody wants to move to and get back to me on which is worse -- but this does make me think hard about the ways in which the people who move to a new city for short-term opportunity might not care at all about its long-term viability.

debt 8y ago

“virtue signaling” Ew please refrain from echoing alt-right invented language here.

dvtrn 8y ago
The "alt-right" absolutely did not invent the phrase 'virtue signaling', though one could probably make a (shaky) argument that they're guilty of deploying it most uncharitably. I don't think this is the place for that discussion though.
- AnimalMuppet 8y ago
  I also don't think this is the place for trying to shut down the conversation based on who is associated with a word or phrase used. If there's something wrong with it's use in this context, "debt" should make that case, rather than trying to police the language.
  - dvtrn 8y ago
    Agreed. I was struggling to find a way to state this as well but choose to shut up when words eluded me. Is the phrase "virtue signaling" sometimes deployed by people with shitty intent? Yes. That doesn't mean the phrase has no value at all and I think in the context used its usage above was perfectly apt. If one thinks otherwise they ought to articulate a counterpoint instead of expecting all discussion on the point to stop because of their own personal hangups with bad actors. Something something nuanced political debate is dead
    - AnimalMuppet 8y ago
      Nuanced political debate may not be dead, but it is certainly being shot at. This is the second time today I've seen someone trying to end a conversation on HN because they labeled a participant as "alt-right". (There was more justification in the other case - the participant may well have been an active alt-right leader - but someone wanted them to be shunned for their off-HN identity, not for what they said here. It's disturbing. Some people (and from what I'm seeing, it's people on the left) want to simply silence other people (on the right) rather than actually answer them. I guess it's less work that way, and maybe more satisfying as well. It's less productive, though - you miss a chance to convince the audience, and you miss a chance to persuade your opponent. You gain the chance to make the audience make sure they never say the "taboo" words in the future, though... but that's more of a totalitarian approach than a reasonable tactic for a free people.