4 ms·
These stats are bad, but it's much worse than just sloppy data gathering in the survey. See the discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17610221 h
by Bartweiss 8y ago
These stats are bad, but it's much worse than just sloppy data gathering in the survey. See the discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17610221 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17610221
You can get numbers much like HuffPo's if you compare urban San Francisco (population 800,000) to Toronto (population 3,000,000). Which is grossly misleading to begin with, but they then listed it as "Silicon Valley" in the headline and the "San Francisco Bay Area" in the body. Which are, obviously, three fundamentally different regions.
The CBRE data probably isn't perfect, but projecting their San Francisco percentage change back to 2013 does match Census Bureau numbers surprisingly well. Things get a bit confusing in 2018 because it looks like CBRE changed their grouping from SV and SF separately to the whole Bay combined.
Unfortunately, HuffPo didn't know or care about that distinction, so we got this article instead.
- Tsarbomb 8y agoThat discussion doesn't mention that when people commonly refer to Toronto from abroad they refer to the GTA which is a population 6,300,000 or the broader Golden Horseshoe urban area which can include the other tech hub (Waterloo) which brings the number to over 9,200,000. This just makes it all the more confusing.
- elevenoh 8y agoIt must include Waterloo.. But yes, this is unbelievably ambiguous.
- Bartweiss 8y agoInteresting, thanks. Not knowing Toronto, I didn't know if it described a standard metro area like some cities do. So now we've got three regions on each side, and no sign which of the 9 possible comparisons is being employed? What a mess.