3 ms·
> SF strikes me as one that may never be what it once was The history of SF is literally that it never reverts exactly to any of its previous incarnations. Aft
by microtherion 6y ago
> SF strikes me as one that may never be what it once was
The history of SF is literally that it never reverts exactly to any of its previous incarnations. After the gold rush, it didn't return to being a sleepy fishing village, or whatever it was, after the 1906 earthquake, it didn't rebuild exactly as before, nor did it after the 1989 earthquake (where the rebuild only ended a few years ago).
When you say "what it once was", are you referring to the Haight/Ashbury scene of the Summer of Love? The Church of Satan at its Heyday? The gay scene before the arrival of AIDS? SF before Web 1.0? SF before Web 2.0? SF DURING Web 2.0?
I don't doubt that SF will be different a few years from now. It's not a given to me that it will be worse. And in fact, maybe letting some of the excess money evaporate and have some of the more opportunistic fortune hunters move on will create breathing space that will help SF hit its next groove.
- kbos87 6y agoVery fair point - I should have said that I don’t see SF reverting to what it was characterized by most recently. I mean an unusual concentration of tech talent, sky high property values, and massive income disparities.
- microtherion 6y agoI see the second of these as a downright negative and the third as problematic (I'm in favor of material rewards, but also in favor of a basic income). Talent concentration is good, but in boom times sometimes seems to get a bit too monocultural.