Hacker News Reader

Comment by colechristensen | Hacker News Reader

As is the tech world being so concentrated in a single area.

Back to first principles: Location, location, location.

Either build more concentrated housing like Manhattan or make commuting from a longer distance more efficient. Perhaps a little of both.

Google has $60 billion in overseas cash. Negotiate a tax deal to build the Google Maglev from SF to San Jose, turning the 50 mile journey into a 20 minute commute.

Why not make working from home more efficient instead? We run from home and it works fine. Meet once every few minths somewhere nice (as you save all those costs for an office, expensive housing etc). I did both scenario's multiple times and I have not found more efficiency in sitting in an office together /most/ of the time.

The D programming language dev team is all over the world, every continent but Antarctica. I initially worried that it would be a mess to work together, but with github/Skype/email/forums and the annual D conference it works surprisingly well.

Doesn't work as well as collocated teams even more so for a start-up where team collaboration is key.

Life is about tradeoffs. There are certainly successful startups that are significantly distributed. But I don't really disagree with your general point. I suspect that we'll see startups for which collocation is a priority increasingly looking outside the Bay area.

We are a startup. We collaborate fine; I think this is a myth and/or it depends on getting the right people.

And to that point; you can sit in an office in another city or state which costs a fraction. You are not in silicon valley just because you need to sit together in your startup right?

But from experience a collocated team works better - some types of work are more suited to remote working LOB support for a mature system for example.

If you want to make commuting more efficient, wouldn't it make more sense to have the maglev run from the east bay (or somewhere much more affordable) than SF? I haven't read great things about real estate affordability in that market. How would such a maglev will help affordability in SV?

I think more likely alternatives are:

* build up if a high density coalition can be assembled (unlikely, but possible)

* people stop moving to the bay area or leave when they are ready to settle down. Remote work becoming more acceptable may be part of this.

We face some of the same issues where I am (Boulder), but of course nothing near the intensity. We have huge chunks of uninhabited plains to our east that are being built out. If we have the water for it, and can handle the in commute traffic, we are good to go. (I realize those are big ifs!)

Good luck trying to get any high capacity public transport built in California in less than 20 years. That's the main problem, everybody is fine with stuff being built just not in their back yard or with their tax dollars.

Note that 50 mile in 20min is a (relatively modest for european standards) 240 km/h. The fastest links in europe can sustain 270-300km/h, using traditional, overground trains. Since you would probably need to dig, you don't care as much about noise and you could easily go at top speeds using 70s technology.

However, you probably can't succeed with just two terminals 50 miles apart from each other. It'll likely be more successful with 3-4 outlying stations, meaning you won't be at "cruise" for the entire 50 mile journey. Still, 30 minutes is also a win over the current status, especially if it's direct to the campus where you work (no "last mile" problem on that end).

Those are long distance TGV trains not commuter services - though I can get from 65 miles out of London to work (near st Pauls) in just over an hour.

> Either build more concentrated housing like Manhattan

Manhattan is not affordable either. Especially considering that getting kids in good schools is famously challenging.

But one could argue that Manhattan's ultra density tends to geographically consolidate lots of the craziness to a small area. The outer boroughs are quite reasonable in comparison to either the article, SF or Manhattan, but are still within NYC boundaries.

another solution is to spread out the interesting stuff more.

I think higher-density zoning is an easier thing to do in real life, but if this were Sim City I'd concentrate on making more areas be somewhat independent, so we don't all feel the need to go to the same spot

Why not run the Maglev the other direction into Stockton or even Sacramento? The last thing San Fran needs is even more housing competition. Stockton is dirt cheap, San Fran is still crazy expensive.

But "Mag lev to Stockton" doesn't sound so sexy despite being a more rational idea.

Maybe Google instead ought to learn about remote work instead of blowing billions on a Mag Lev.

Remote work is the cheapest most efficient way if you really look at it. It is the future. The culture is growing and slowly and organically we'll get there.

Hopefully it's a future of options: not mandatory to work remotely. I'm with the majority though: I prefer to work from the office most of the time

Yeah, even as far out as Dublin is still very pricey.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com