text: Anti-Dot-Com Slogans Pepper SF 240
  marks writes "Wired is carrying a story about some folks in San Francisco that are going around and putting up anti-dot-com stickers such as 'blowthedotoutyourass.com' and 'ButIDon'tNeedMyToothPasteDelivered.com.' They even have a website (blowthedotoutyourass.com) where other people can download and print their slogans and paste them other places. Its funny, in that sick, twisted, 'If I hear one more website commercial I'm gonna kill someone' way."
  San Francisco - The City Of Hate (Score:1)
  A lot has sure changed since SF was the City of Love, and welcomed change!
  (I'll post anonymously for once, since I don't want to get in trouble over this.)
  Re:Sour Grapes? (Score:1)
  The only irony is how little geeks have matured (Score:1)
  Re:is anyone else distressed by this: (Score:1)
  Yes, it has. There are some important issues you're not getting.
  This isn't about how people spend their money. The problem is that long-time residents, including many who made SF a desirable place to live in the first place, are being kicked out onto the street. It's not just artists; ethinic diversity is being lost too.
  Please remember that the dot-com explosion in SF arose from the multimedia industry in SOMA in the mid-90's, which was started by artists in the early 90's because they could get cheap warehouse space there. And the artists are here because of the tolerant and multicultural environment that SF used to have.
  It's not as simple as "people not wanting change", no matter what Mayor Brown says. Let's say I corner the market on food and means of its production, and then refuse to give you any. I bet you'd complain about that "change" too. The housing crisis is not about aesthetics, it's about desperate situations and even SURVIVAL for some people.
  Please don't pretend class differences and struggle don't exist. Yuppies and high-tech people (and I'm one) are in much greater positions of power than most working class people, and most white people (and I'm one) are in greater positions of power than non-white people. This is why your comparisons to racial segregationists are invalid. When the non-powerful try to defend what little they have against the powerful, to avoid becoming homeless, it's hardly the same as white people trying to keep black people out of the neighborhood. In Detroit and Chicago, the sheriff didn't come to the door with a gun to physically remove white people from their homes. In SF, he does.
  You clearly haven't been in SF very long, or thought very deeply about social issues. Most yuppies don't, because they don't have to. You can maintain your illusion, as long as you have money.
  I'm not dismissing your ideas out of hand. I'm dismissing them because I've heard them a hundred times before and they still don't stand up to scrutiny by anyone who's familiar with the issues.
  Re:Pressure in SF (Score:1)
  I grew up in Sunnyvale, and now that I'm in my twenties I'll probably never be able to afford housing in my home town.
  I think the whiners up north should try coming down here for a while and realize they aren't the only ones being forced out by slicon implants.
  IPO? (Score:1)
  Re:San Francisco - The City Of Hate (Score:1)
  Anyhow, my point is that any established 'cool place' probably isn't. Look for someplace new, especially if it sounds uncool (Portland, Lincoln, etc.)
  Re:Right on, blowthewholedamnthingoutyourass.com (Score:1)
  94 was the year I got on the internet. Coincidence? I think not.
  //Caine - caine@evilconspirations'r'us.com
  well said!! (Score:1)
  Because some Gen-Xers need... (Score:1)
  I'm probably the only one... (Score:1)
  When these people are able to come back with some reasoned position instead of a bunch of vulgar slogans which they use to vandalize public porperty, they can come talk to me.
  --
  So let's toss both! (Score:1)
  modern grown internet is more usable and nice
  than the old internet? Sheesh!
  Re:Pressure in SF (Score:1)
  Re:(OT) Pacific NW (Score:1)
  Yeah, a friend's going to school there (and I passed thru while on a cross-country vacation about 16 years ago.. Vancouver, Seattle, Spokane, Portland, then east thru Idaho, Montana, etc.. Very cool to have teachers for parents, as they have 2 months to burn on a trip like that) and he loves it.. Very free up there, though the gas is real expensive
  Cheers,
  Your Working Boy,
  Re:San Francisco - The City Of Hate (Score:1)
  New Rochelle (where my loft is located) is about as uncool as you can get, though you _can_ get ?DSL, and isn't that all that matters?
  Your Working Boy,
  Re:Star Fleet (Score:1)
  Re:you-suck.com (Score:1)
  Re:To my fellow Sebring Attendees: (Score:1)
  Re:The internet pisses me off too! (Score:1)
  ---
  icq:2057699
  seumas.com
  Re:uhm (Score:1)
  --
  Re:How grown up (Score:1)
  Dueling Posters (Score:1)
  ObSpellCheck: It should be "MoreNippleWaxThanAnyone.com."
  Re:Pressure in SF (Score:1)
  On the other hand, it does create a situation where some people are paying far below "market" rents, while others who have just moved in are actually paying far above the market rents. The difference between the below-market rent (that artists etc can afford) and the above-market rent (that computer professionals can afford) is so great that eventually the Landlord figures out some way to evict the tenents -- even if they could afford the 'average' rent somewhere in the middle. This is radically changing the population of the city.
  It's the law of unintended consequences, I guess. And there isn't a really good way to fix the problem. (God help us if they repeal rent control at this point.)
  BTW, Rent Control in SF applies to any building built before 1979 with two units or more. That's probably ~80% of the rental housing stock. As for Marin County, it's an upper class enclave and there's almost no rental housing there, except way up in Novato. I have a few blue collar cousins that grew up in Marin and were basically forced over to the East Bay because of the lack of even moderately affordable housing.
  --
  Re:Sour Grapes? (Score:1)
  -mark
  blowthedotoutyourass.com really exists (Score:1)
  whois blowthedotoutyourass.com@whois.register.com
  shows that the domain is registered to somebody in Chicago, and there even is a web server at [blowthedotoutyourass.com].
  SORRY (old news) (Score:1)
  There goes karma
  I didn't ask for higher prices (Score:1)
  Regards,
  Easy there Johnny! (Score:1)
  it don't trickle down, man! (Score:1)
  Re:Sour Grapes? (Score:1)
  9/10 already go under. In fact if 1 in 10 businesses that you invest in make it, you've got a pretty nice profit. Consider that dotcoms that score big, will give you 100/1 profits. And it's not like the businesses that fail leave the city in ruin. It happens every day, yet the unemployeement rate stays at an all time low. I don't see any kind of crash you are refering to anytime soon.
  UA is remotely related to The-Revolution [the-revolution.org] in that remote viewing kind of way.
  i will have to try to add T-R and UA meme to the DC LUG's Protest of DMCA [slashdot.org] just because DC needs laugh, here and there...
  nmarshall
  #include "standard_disclaimer.h"
  R.U. SIRIUS: THE ONLY POSSIBLE RESPONSE
  Re:is anyone else distressed by this: (Score:1)
  I assume you mean they're burning someone else's cross, other than their own?
  Ad Spoofs (Score:1)
  My favorite is the one for Obsession [adbusters.org]
  Prion
  Re:Pressure in SF (Score:1)
  Well, where would you all the awful more-affluent people to live? It shouldn't be a difficult problem to solve...it's not like they're human beings who have every right to try to rent a place to live. And the people who own houses and rent them out don't have right to try to actually charge as much rent as someone is willing to pay them.
  Attempts to fight off normal market interactions through rent controls or overt violence and intimidation (yeah, sure, such a movement would really stop at scratching up some SUVs if it got any momentum) only serve to disadvantage a community at a later time, as demand fades, property values plummet, and insurance rates rise in response to a poor rent market and perception of high criminality.
  And, yes, this sort of xenophobic response is exactly like the reactions minorities get when they move into white neighborhoods. The hostility is always framed in a claim of the need for economic self-defense, and many people come to believe their rationalizations for it, but the hostility always originally comes from the strangeness of the newcomers. Mix in the envy of artistic types who currently aren't faring well in the marketplace for techies whose skills are in great demand, and there you go. Instant grass-roots outrage.
  As for "Anti-dot-com"...Were there people who had such a reaction when businesses started including phone numbers in their ads?
  So get overpaid elsewhere.... (Score:1)
  Re:Fuck Adobe (Score:1)
  They built the (a Adobe building?) Adobe building _right next_ to my ol' elementary school! Grr!
  Methinx I haven't been there since....
  Latez,
  --"LEVIATHAN"
  Re:imadumbassvandal.org (Score:1)
  ShowSomeTact.com (Score:1)
  JOhn
  If you can't beat 'em, whine at 'em. (Score:1)
  You don't get it, do you? (Score:2)
  My favorite part:
  "Shiny, 24-year-old people who were all very hip and cool [were] going into this thing. We just couldn't believe that this is what it had come down to -- that this was a cool thing in the Mission -- to go to these kind of dot-com opening parties and stuff. So we came back and threw some eggs at them."
  Face it, we're the next generation of yuppie scum. Even if you're not rolling in pre-IPO stock, you're exposed to such backlash, by merely whipping out your Pilot, or saying you do 'computer stuff'. Sometimes it's a groan & rolling of eyes, or you get passed off to the other geek in the room, or better yet, they glare & report that 'I hate computers'. And really, I can't blame them. We're pummelled with it, especially in the Bay Area... it's not so much the 'net & computers, but the inane corporate.com culture that's in our face, 24-7. It was all fun & games until the barrage of ads began.
  related.. (Score:2)
  --
  Re:San Francisco - The City Of Hate (Score:2)
  People have asked why I don't consider moving to CA to be with the other tech nerds ('in my element' is the frequent refrain), instead of staying in NYC. This is why. Then again, maybe between the Doge everyone loves to hate and the NYPD ('Hold on officer, it's a wallet!') the citizenry doesn't have enough attention-span to spend on loathing tech nerds. Either that or there's _waaaay_ much more building space on which to sell ads.. (or maybe people've just been hating me for decades and I don't really give a shit anymore)..
  I'd definitely consider the Pacific NW (Vancouver, WA, OR, been to all and enjoyed them a lot) or NH or VT tho, as long as the gun laws are adequately free (hell, in VT IIRC you can carry a loaded pistol concealed in your car, and I don't know OTTOMH any other state that's legal)..
  I gotta admit though, I get a chuckle when I see that Doubleclick ad by the Flatiron building.. I just keep thinking about how many pennies they're not getting thanks to me using Junkbuster [waldherr.org].
  Your Working Boy,
  Re:imadumbassvandal.org (Score:2)
  Sounds like they've already solved this problem [cnn.com] in South Africa..
  Your Working Boy,
  Re:imadumbassvandal.org (Score:2)
  Re:The internet pisses me off too! (Score:2)
  Re:Pot==Kettle==Black (Score:2)
  Re:is anyone else distressed by this: (Score:2)
  Re: Ooo, see the slashdot effect. (Score:2)
  --
  Dan
  Ironic? (Score:2)
  Re:This kicks ass (Score:2)
  Wouldn't Tuttle have been a better choice? Or was that Buttle...?
  Dot coms (Score:2)
  Re:I'm probably the only one... (Score:2)
  theresnosuchthingasbadpublicity.com (Score:2)
  Historical note: (Score:2)
  The machines were originally built as networked boxen that lived on the network and could be produced for much less than the "mainframes" or whatever of the time. Ironic that many SUN workstations are now being replaced by Linux and (sadly) NT workstations because they are cheaper..
  Noooo! (Score:2)
  Just HairyDrunkenLactatingSpottedMonkies.com should be worth $300M alone!
  Re:imadumbassvandal.org (Score:2)
  Although by the looks of things Andre the Giant still has a posse.
  Re:youarealsowhining.com (Score:2)
  But then again, they also stuck them on steet signs and legitimate ads.
  I imagine it has more to do with the person placing the posters than the organization itself. Do you think Nissan, Nintendo, and HBO condone vandalism?
  nomoreprisons.net (Score:2)
  I don't know how annoying the SF labels are. I do know that spray paint on sidewalk will wear off in a few months, and that it has a hell of a lot less negative impact on my quality of life than a lot of billboards (or worse, TV screens in airports). I'd much rather give the right to spam my environment over to those who care (yes, that includes sidewalk evangelists) rather than those who just have more money than I do.
  Re:is anyone else distressed by this: (Score:2)
  I'm sorry -- trying to draw a distinction between hating someone because you don't like where he puts his money and hating someone because you don't like where he puts his penis is puerile it-depends-on-what-the-meaning-of-'is'-is sophistry.
  /.
  Fuck Adobe (Score:2)
  --GnrcMan--
  Re:I'm probably the only one... (Score:2)
  --GnrcMan--
  (OT) Pacific NW (Score:2)
  I'm in Seattle. I assume you mean Vancouver BC, which is a cool place. There's a town in WA, right across the border from Portland, called Vancouver. It's kind of a shithole.
  I would recommend against Seattle. It gets on your nerves and wears you down. Traffic sucks. Costs are outrageous due to the abundance of dot coms and MS millionaires. People here are so apathetic it isn't even funny. And everyone drives an SUV and bitches about how much gas costs. I'm only here because my girlfriend is finishing up her Classics degree at UW.
  Portland, OR on the other hand, is a wonderful city. I'd move there in a second. If you are going to move to the Pacific Northwest, that is the place to be. Just watch out for a scary man named Lon Mabon.
  --GnrcMan--
  Re:imadumbassvandal.org (Score:2)
  Easy: they get a lot of people's attention very quickly, just like e-marketers do. And that, of course, is the whole point here -- they're trying to make a point to a lot of people very quickly. Looks to me like it's working.
  Writing a book about it is in this case pretty much pointless -- anyone that picks up the book is probably a sympathizer in the first place. Making a web site will only draw so many hits unless it becomes a meme (which has actually begun to happen in this case, just as it did with Mahir et al). Taking to the streets with posters is just... so... non-digital, I can't really take that seriously for this effort.
  No, I think Mr Lowry is on the right track here -- these pseudo-ads are great, and I hope to see them pop up all over the place. San Francisco, Boston, London, everywhere. We're in the midst of a gold rush with a dirty little secret: there ain't no gold to be found! It's time that news became a bit more well known, even if it does kick your startup in the belly. Sorry guys, them's the breaks -- the party needs to end & we need to clean up the mess we've made.
  Re:SF brought this on itself - don't blame us (Score:2)
  I think you're ignoring a lot of (not so recent) history and geography
  ...
  Internet companies didn't make it practially illegal to build new housing in SF. SF politicians did.
  More like it has something to do with the fact that almost every square inch of SF has been developed for decades now - even out in the far avenues there are row after row of 2 story houses - if you want to build new housing you have to knock down housing that already has people living in it - that becomes a political problem
  You could argue that the political corruption scandals that resulted in San Mateo county being broken off from SF county at the turn of the century were "of it's own making" - but no one involved is still alive to my knowledge
  Internet companies didn't refuse to do anything about traffic or parking, and then complained about the resulting mayhem. SF politicians did.
  Of maybe it has something to do with much of SF being built up before cars were in common uses - all those victorians with 4-6 apartments in them don't have garages for a reason - people didn't have cars when they were built - and there was good public transport - now each of those people living in those apartments want their own SUV and street parking is a nightmare. This is nothing new - I had the same problem when I lived in the Haight 15 years ago - in the end we ditched our car and used the buses - we usually got where we wanted faster anyway.
  Internet companies didn't impose a state of war between renters and landlords through rent control. SF politicians did.
  This has been going on for a couple of generations SF has a really big problem with spiralling rents for people on fixed incomes - the politicians are after all just representiung the voters. Rent control has been viciously fought over every 3-4 years for as long as I can remember
  However, SF politicians didn't invent blaming all their problems on the nasty subhuman outsiders. That one is universal.
  Actually SF politicos seem divided on this one - in fact it's a historical divide - between the ones who represent and suck up to downtown big-business and the more populist ones who try and represent the voters. Besides after a few years the 'outsiders' become locals and start griping about the latest batch of immigrants
  Pot==Kettle==Black (Score:2)
  It's like a drunk making fun of Budweiser while finishing off the last drop in his 40oz bud.
  _______________
  Re:Read the comments in the html (Score:2)
  This gives me the idea that they are bitter overgrown adolescents getting off on their 'subversiveness'.
  Jealousy of Seattle ? The NW Slackers got to have their revolution, and now SF wants its own.-- Reclaim The Trustfunds
  The crash will hit the small guys first (Score:2)
  I don't agree that ending the transient state will be a good thing.
  A crunch is a crunch. People get hurt. Small investors will take a very big hit on the collapse of the ecomm boom. Let's face it, we like to think of VCs as those lovely rich people who keep us in big lunches and new G4s, while we bleed them dry, but where did their money come from ? A lot of the fund money floating around now is either Joe Sixpack's own little day-trading adventure, or it's Doreen Bluerinse's life-savings in a Fund that was late into
  .com and still can't tell the difference between Amazon and Lastminute, or Cisco and Iridium.
  What happened in '29 ? Banks got burned, and when a bank gets burned, it takes it out on its smaller creditors. Rockefeller didn't find a bank trying to repossess his mansion, but a lot of poor Okie farmers did.
  It's amusing, but... (Score:2)
  This is fairly amusing, but don't you all think there are significantly more important issues that need attention. Sure, a lot of the people who read/post/submit to
  /. care about those things, and that's great, but this anti-dot-com thing, with all its bumper stickers and whatnot is going to get way more public attention than any of the stuff that really matters. Sure, anti-IP patent bumperstickers aren't going to be as interesting, and probalby are not the best idea, but it's far more relevant.
  I guess this is just showing me that all the discussion and arguments and thoughts that take place on
  /. are hampered by the fact that /. is one of the few places they can take place. So how can we spread the word about more prevelant issues than the dot-com sillyness to the mostly ignorant public? The deCSS t-shirts would seem to be a start, except I doubt they make much sense to most people, and line upon line of seemingly random characters isn't all that appealling.
  The anti-dot-com fanfare is ok, but it's only really going against something that's not all that important, and will die out soon enough anyways. I'm not sure how serious the people running it actually are, but if they really want to change the future of the internet, they should focus on something relevant.
  Location-location-location.......internet??? (Score:2)
  I understand that it provides a method for new companies to recruit talent from other local companies without requireing the employee to move but it would seem to me that a company could either startup or move to somewhere like Ann Arbor, Madison, Boulder or Austin, still offer the same stupidly overvalued salaries and allow the employees to live like kings in some pretty cool cities. Why does this not happen very much? Are the VC's trying to drive up the values of their real estate investments?
  Any other reasons for this?
  Sour Grapes? (Score:2)
  The domain names picked although funny are also very revealing about them e.g. ShredsOfSomeonesSoulForAuction.com, FuckYouAndTheStartupYouRodeInOn.com. After all in Silicon valley everyone feels they should be a millionairre and since does not hold true it seems the losers (again by Silicon valley standards) have decided that if they can't have it no one else will. I wonder how native SFer's feel about these ads and all the wealth being thrown around by snot-nosed geeks with more money than they know what to do with.
  PS: I submitted this last night and it got declined. Go figure.
  Re:is anyone else distressed by this: (Score:2)
  You miss the point...it isn't about how some snot nosed programmers and geeks are lavishly spending their money . This is about people and organizations who have lived in San Francisco for years and perhaps even generations that are being forced out of their homes simply because they are not as well to do as the snot nosed geeks who showed up in the city less than five years ago. I'll give you 2 true life examples that show exactly how different the San Francisco situation is from the racist scenario you liken it to.
  PS: Full disclosure. I am a black, snot nosed punk programmer who hopes to launch a startup.
  The sad truth is... (Score:2)
  It is no wonder there is such a backlash against them. In fact, when I was there this whole thing was already gaining steam with some groups in San Francisco openly vandalizing rich dot-commers cars and property, in hopes to drive them out. I don't condone such actions but it goes to show just how desparate the situation is for many people.
  I think the solution to this problem is already taking form as many dotcoms are actually locating in other places that have a lower cost of living and thereby alleviating the already exploding situation in Silicon Valley.
  Just my two cents.
  Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
  NPS Internet Solutions, LLC [npsis.com]
  Anti-hype, not anti-web - the revolution begins (Score:2)
  Let me put it clearly for you: NASDAQ is the biggest, baddest pyramid scheme on the planet.
  The money that is being made on NASDAQ is coming from somewhere, and it's coming from moms and pops all over the world. It's going into dot-coms, many of which have never, and will never, have any genuine commercial value.
  Part of the problem here is that you have everybody eying the wealth that appears to be getting created from thin air on NASDAQ, and thinking "I'd like some of that."
  There is, however, a fundamental principle of economics. That is, if everybody suddenly tomorrow had ten million dollars, then ten million dollars suddenly wouldn't make you wealthy. All it would do is create sudden and serious inflation.
  While we're not quite at that point, we are getting a ludicrous number of people being ludicrously wealthy, and that is simply unsustainable. The system is headed for a major breaking point.
  The last global revolution was the industrial revolution. It created massive upheaval worldwide, and ushered in the age of capitalism. The coming revolution will happen for not dissimilar reasons, and will usher in a new economic paradigm to replace capitalism. And if that revolution becomes difficult, don't be surprised to see the other type of revolution, with guns.
  Re:iagree.com (Score:2)
  And to drive this point home, I just ran out to the store to pick up a few items and happened to glance at the 3/27 issue of Time magazine.   Guess what's on the front cover?   Stephen King, his face and upper torso as a picture on a computer monitor, with his hand reaching out of it to a keyboard directly in front.
  Front cover title of this journalistic brilliance?   "'icandoit.com' and you can too".
  I live in Philly - whoever has those "anti-dot com" materials that the article mentioned were going to be handed out here on the east coast - PLEASE GET THEM HERE FAST!!!!
  Re:This kicks ass (Score:2)
  We've got those and the barges in Philly too.   First time I saw one of those flatbed truck signs was a couple of years ago.   I thought it was just one company's unique way of advertising.   Then I kept seeing them and seeing them and cursed having to drive behind one too!   Please don't forget the small planes dragging a banner through the sky with some "dot com" on it and I've even seen some sky-writers spell out "dot com" companies as an ad! (true).
  Alot of this sort of thing started when alot of cities started banning billboards in residential neighborhoods, so the advertisers "took their show on the road" so to speak.
  One thing that's interesting is the massive increase in radio advertising for these "dot coms".   Probably 3/4 of the ads I hear on all-news stations are either for "computerjobs.com" or some other "tech-relatedindustry.com".
  And I know that tech and businesses on the internet have brought an amazing amount of jobs and wealth but I'd like to see the field mature a bit, without all the hype.   Okay, it's here, so lets move on.   JMHO.
  iagree.com (Score:2)
  Re:Except that's not what this is all about (Score:2)
  And I was gonna point out NASA's Beowulf cluster [beowulf.org] but then you'd say... ohhhhh...   fsck it!  
  Actually want to make a point that hasn't been touched here yet and that is this:   Remember learning in U.S. History about what happened, oh...   around 1849 in San Fran?   A little thing called the "gold rush"?   Looks like we're seeing a repeat in history here some 150 years later...
  And for those who are new to that area and/or are considering the latest dot com gold rush, remember that the last sortof big earthquake occurred when? In 1989?   And they're looonnngggg overdue.   I remember watching the World Series when Candlestick Park (OOPPPSSS!!!   WRONG NAME!   Ahem.   "3COM Park", I believe it was later called) was literally being shaken apart.   If you like San Andreas fault living, be my guest.   Zico and me will stick with the Linux-caused hurricaines and blizzards and tornadoes on the east coast!
  And by the way, regarding the real estate there?   ALL that stuff has to go - the Presidio included.   I mean come on.   How the hell can they start building Star Fleet Academy with those damn dot coms in the way, huh?   Let's start moving to the REAL technology!
  Re:can't have one w/o the other (Score:2)
  I think this is a given.   In order to "get noticed" to sell a product or service, a company needs to advertise.   My complaint is not so much companies advertising, but doing a "me too" by making a big production out of being "dot com" companies as well - and this is in reference to many of your "traditional" companies who have been pressured to become a "dot com".   And the straw that breaks the camel's back is the media's obsessive reporting on the whole "dot com" phenomena.   So what you basically get is advertising + media reports == more (now free) advertising which means overkill.
  Last night, I heard a "personal business" report on an all-news station which described some "ecommerce" (sigh... more "e"s) local shopping portal site and how they plan to expand to include more stores to choose from.   Now unless this particular web site (which is a commercial business) happened to have paid for the fact that they were featured in this brief report, what did they get?   Free advertising!   And from an all-news station that presented this thing as if it was some kind of "community affairs" or "for your information" type thing.   Previously, these kinds of things reported on non-profits and maybe what they were doing in the business world or they reported on market trends or gave advise on stocks or business ventures, etc.   But to feature a web site (again unless it was really a paid-for infomercial rather than a report) as a "report" is downright misleading!
  oh and btw anyone ever think about the fact that the com in XXXXXX.com means commerce?
  I thought it meant "commercial"...
  Re:Microsoft? (Score:2)
  Re:Location-location-location.......internet??? (Score:2)
  and "coolness" factor of being in SV.
  and consider how many dot.com's in SV are started by or recruit heavily from either UCBerkeley or Stanfurd grads who really don't care to move out of the area just yet -- a lot of them dig the Bay Area and don't even LOOK outside of it for work.
  Re:is anyone else distressed by this: (Score:2)
  Here [sfgate.com] is a nice story from sf on the dot.whatevers impact in SOMA.
  Fighting Progress in SF, V2 (Score:2)
  While people may regard SF as a home for hippies, flakes and freaks, it wasn't always this way. This radical transformation in the 50's was as hard fought as the hippie/dotcom struggle is today.
  Those fighting progress in SF now are cut from the same cloth as those at the heart of the tumult forty years ago.
  This kicks ass (Score:3)
  Couple that with the rather annoying fact that a lot of these pointless (and hopeless) businesses are making money for their employees anyway, and you have a pretty silly situation. It's good to see someone publicly decrying this absurdity.
  -jwb
  Re:Sour Grapes? (Score:3)
  Re:is anyone else distressed by this: (Score:3)
  You don't understand 'tolerance.' Tolerance is a live-and-let-live attitude. If it were a matter of 'oh, I don't like my neighbor's nice new car, I wish it were gone,' it would be a matter of simple resentment. If I don't like my neighbor's sexual practices or hobbies or skin color, that's intolerance. But that's not the problem.
  The problem is an inflationary economy, and the effect on a market when a good sector of the consuming side of the market has a lot more income than another, the local economy will server the former far more than the latter. Food prices skyrocket. Rents and housing go up. Police serve the class in favor over the class that isn't - someone who would have be a functional part of the community 7 years ago is now an 'eyesore' today and hassled by cops. The proliferation of SUVs is a huge problem in a city with a parking crunch, and often present a menace to pedestrians and bicyclists.
  There have been a lot of evictions of poorer residents in order to be able to rent at ridiculously higher rates to new ones (fortunately there is some rent and eviction control, but increasingly landlords are weakening it and making loopholes.) New residents in SOMA, where I live, will move near a nightclub, then complain about the noise, move a lot of political money around, and have the night club closed. (Ask jwz, himself a silicon implant 'gone native,' about this [dnalounge.com] sometime.)
  People are defending an already rare lifestyle, and they are also protecting some of the little character that exists in an increasingly homogenous, franchised country. San Francisco is - or will have been - one of the last urban places with a true sense of place. (Check out jwz's rant on Silicon Valley [jwz.org] to see what many people here are trying to prevent.) You are confusing 'tolerance' with 'acquiesence.'
  Re:Pressure in SF (Score:3)
  Some details to be aware of are that there is no commercial rent control, which has a whole slew of corallary effects on market motivation.
  That said, your point about the exploding cost of housing in other (non rent-controlled!) parts of the Bay Area is quite accurate, and I'd forgotten it. One little irony is that Marin County, once the most beautiful expensive counties in the Bay Area, has become remained a lot more affordable (especially for renters) and largely avoided the crunch of the rest of the Bay Area. It's not cheap, by any means, but their decision to NOT invest in a lot of transportation infrastructure, and to keep many of their interior roads one-lane and to completely control growth (it's virtually impossible to build on green land in most of the county) has made the portions of it that are far from the freeway an unattractive option to commuters, and kept housing prices stable.
  Re:Read the comments in the html (Score:3)
  This gives me the idea that they are bitter overgrown adolescents getting off on their 'subversiveness'. Please. Maybe these people can grow up actually do something that will help their community. I'm glad that they are trying to voice their opinion, I just feel that without a constructive aspect, their campaign is pure egotism.
  Anyway, I was much more subversive than this when I was in high school. Maybe I'm just jealous because nothing I did was published on a web site.
  Re:Pressure in SF (Score:3)
  A couple things are happening here:
  1) Land values are skyrocketing around the whole bay. There simply isn't enough land to go around, and poor people and industrial usage are feeling it. Unlike in the 1980s boom, San Francisco hasn't been excepted this time, and rents here are actually similar or lower to Cupertino or anywhere else. The perception is that SF is being 'invaded' by computer jocks that want to enjoy the lifestyle while destroying it. The reality is that many people are being pushed here by the more intolerable situation in SV.
  2) Rent Control is having the reverse effect of increasing evictions, rather than decreasing them. Quite a few people have been holed up for years in a victorian flat paying $800/month, split 4 or 5 ways. Obviously, if the landlord can slap on a coat of paint and get $3000 for the same flat, he'll find a way. And since he doesn't want to get into a situation where he's below market again, he might jack that $3000 up to $3500. This sort of thing totally distorts the economics in a city where most people rent.
  But anyways, you're right. The days of San Francisco being a real artistic center are probably over. Most of that community is either trust funded or entrenched and over 35 years old. The fear is that we'll end up like a big version of Carmel-by-the-Sea or Sausilito, and the art will be pastel pictures of balloons and seagulls floating over the golden gate.
  --
  Ooo, see the slashdot effect. (Score:3)
  Gentrification (Score:3)
  Maybe we need this dotshit
  I hate to sound like a gun manufacturer or a child pr0nographer, but it seems like the eToothpaste eDelivery eServices and the trade-stocks-at-3-AM and dancingsquidtitties.com wouldn't be there if people didn't want them. Their movement into the web is more or less the inevitable result of the common folk moving into the web.
  So, while I understand the frustration of one of the most empowering communication and information-transforming tools ever created being used to sell crap even more useless than the crap we sold last week, it may be a great opportunity for those with brains. The eOverload lowers the noise-to-signal ratio, but it doesn't drive good information out. If little Johnny's dad gets a shiny new computer and a DSL line so that he can buy underwear at the speed of light using the Business Model of the Future, that doesn't stop Johnny from visiting GNU [gnu.org] or Bartleby [bartleby.org] or the DXM FAQ [frognet.net]. I'm talking about guerilla education here. Let's let the dots put a computer in every nook and cranny, build powerful internet backbones and make everyone need high-speed reliable access as one of life's basic requirements.
  That's when we move in...
  Re:is anyone else distressed by this: (Score:3)
  I'm afraid that this has lost me a little-- I'm failing to see how disliking how a community member chooses to spend his/her money is any different than who a comm. member chooses to associate with, or how he/she chooses to worship or whatever trite comparission you care to walk around the block. Destroying folk's property (i.e. slashing tires or burning crosses or what have you) doesn't sound tollerant-- although both certainly express resentment (and how!)
  Also, I didn't want to sound like I didn't understand the hostility. I totally understand why any set community dislikes an interlopper-- people don't like change. That's fine. But it's interesting (which isn't to say significant) that the same excuses ("they're screwing up our community's values, messing with our property values, edging us out, taking our rightful places from us") are trotted out by old white suburbanites and younger, hipper artsy San Franciscans.
  Just food for thought. Don't dismiss this out of hand, please.
  End the TLD Tyranny! (Score:3)
  OK, you won't usually hear completely crazy ideas coming from me. But this is different. Those SF people were the usual anti-freedom antitech luddites, but this is an excuse to promote my agenda:
  End all TLDs!!!!
  This sounds funny and/or sarcastic; I fully expect this time to be moderated into the floor. But ever since Ralph Nader's group started advocating whole new TLDs just for their pet causes, it has occurred to me that the whole notion of
  .org .net .whatever is silly.
  It made sense in the old days, when you needed to know at a glance if you could access a site for regulatory reasons (ie certain mil domains accessing com domains, etc). But what purpose do they serve now?
  More web addresses? It doesn't address the limited number of *.*.*.* addresses (there are other solutions for that). Most companies reserve all possible TLDs which could violate their trademarks-- add more TLDs and you won't even see more lawsuits-- the same squatters and the same trademark holders, just more names to fight over.
  It hardly serves as an organizing principle. Is an American private school a
  .com, .edu, or .city.state.us? The latter is ruling of self-appointed Masters of American Domains at USC. They want coke to be coke.atlanta.us. Why? Really, I can't tell. I don't need to look at a web address to tell if I am at a gov't, private or network provider's homepage.
  What we need aren't more top-level domains, but less. We have to drop this
  .com hack and type. Current dot-whatevers can keep their distinctions, but let's let EVERYTHING be a TLD.
  End the TLD Tyranny. In your heart, you know I'm right.
  imadumbassvandal.org (Score:3)
  If they have some kind of point to make, other than whining, there has to be a more productive method of protest than plastering avery labels all over the place.
  Read the comments in the html (Score:4)
  read the comments in the html
  Re:Sour Grapes? (Score:4)
  What the government (state and local) needs to understand is that they must funnel these huge tax surpluses that the Internet economy is creating into capital improvements for school and transportation. If they do, we'll cruise through the recession with new schools and low taxes that just break even on the operating costs.
  -jwb (-= 0.02)
  Except that's not what this is all about (Score:4)
  (Whoa, I'm replying to a JDax post!
  ;-) )
  Everybody gets sick of stuff they hear all the time, whether it's Brittney Spears or "Cha-ching!" However, you don't very often see people going around vandalizing property over it. The reaction that this article (and many others that you can find at the SF Weekly or SF Gate) is talking about is a different phenomenon.
  Namely, it's all about jealousy and class warfare and the incredibly immature (although we've probably all done it at some point) "I got here first, so I'm better" attitude.
  Jealousy and class warfare? This shouldn't come as any surprise to anyone anywhere, but San Francisco (no, I refuse to call it "The City") is particularly notorious for it. The bonus is that it takes no thought whatsoever to join this movement -- just go after anything that looks like a yuppie status symbol: in order, the pager, the cell phone, the SUV, and San Francisco real estate.
  An aside: I never really understood why yuppie youth thought they were cool because they carried a pager on their belt. To me, it's saying, "Yeah, I lack so much independence that I have to be at the beck and call of other people 24 hours a day." But I digress.
  As for the third attitude I mentioned, it's hardly unique to San Francisco, but they seem to do it better than just about anyone save possibly New York City dwellers. Recently, a decent number of gay folks thought it would be fun to start vandalizing people's cars, because too many straight people were moving into their neighborhoods. (How's that for discriminatory irony!) You see it among the Slackers of NYC, too, because the mayor actually had to gall to make run down areas like Times Square safe for families to visit at night. Gasp! This definitely isn't limited to real estate, either, if you've ever heard anyone whine "Man, BandX and TVshowX were so cool, but now they suck because a lot of people like them. Mainstream bastards!"
  In the interest of full disclosure, I should state that we're one of the groups that has moved into a place that was vacated by an organization mentioned elsewhere in this thread at Slashdot because they could no longer afford the rent. It still wouldn't change my opinion on this, though, as I've never been harrassed over it, nor has any of my property been vandalized.
  I will say, however, that the San Francisco land grab is pretty ironic. Technology, and more specifically, the Internet, are supposed to increase our abilities to work together remotely, yet we're all fighting to squeeze into San Francisco, and paying through the nose for the honor.
  And to JDax, since I didn't get a chance to reply last night: Hell, I wasn't going to blame Linux for bad weather forecasting, I was going to blame it for the bad weather itself! Global warming, the recent spate of droughts, floods, and natural disasters: all can be traced back to Torvalds and Cox. It's true!
  :)
  Cheers,
  ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
  Re:This kicks ass (Score:4)
  Example: Many companies are selling (so called) mp3 players which are SDMI compliant. We could run a stickering campaign to attach stickers to the devices (on store sheleves) warning about all the bad things SDMI dose. Stickers could also be attached to shrink wrapped censorware which would warn the consumer about all the good sites the software blocks (like blocked feminists sites, 70% bad blocks in the
  Anywho, the sticker campaign could be really effective for "make people think issues" (like the SF thing) or "get the word out issues" (like my examplkes). The only question is "how do we distribute the stickers?"
  The safest way to distribute the stickers would be to run a web site providing the materials necissary to order the stickers from the various custom sticker outfits online.
  is anyone else distressed by this: (Score:4)
  There were campaigns like this in the suburbs of Detroit and Chicago in the 60's, too. But, those were to keep African-Americans and "foreigners" from moving in or staying. Isn't this a sort of distressing reaction to a shift in population demographic? Isn't SF supposed to be an almost mystical land of community tolerance and acceptation? If "artists" (you know, the voice of culture, those who spend every day slaving to prove that human beings are at least a notch above rabid dogs) are stooping (or, god forbid, gladly taking up) subtle (and not-so-subtle) terror tactics, isn't the art scene already dead?
  As for BlowItOutYourMonkeysButt.com (or whatever the hell it's called,) some of the material is funny (in a sort of AIRTOONS [airtoons.com] kinda way), but it seems to me that the whole campaign is just howling-at-the-moon brand rage: futile not only in its tacit attempt (stickers will kill this dot-com bullshit about as quickly as a water hose will put out the sun) but also in its execution (by setting yourself up as not-A [we hate them dot-com coloninc services!], you basically guarantee that every time you impress your message on someone[look, honey: those artists really hate e-colonics], you're also passing on the much-loathed message you're trying to resist [honey, do you think we should get ourselves colonically irrigated online?]. )
  Oh, crap; does any of this make sense?
  The internet pisses me off too! (Score:4)
  Personally, i don't know what he's talking about. I just took this job as a...i think they call me a SysAd or something...because they have a foosball table. Besides - no one has told me why they call the company i work for "Sun" anyway. I mean...it's really not that well lit around here anyways.
  -FluX
  -------------------------
  Your Ad Here!
  -------------------------
  Pressure in SF (Score:5)
  With a significant segment of the population here taking in income that is an order of magnitude higher than that of the general, non-high-tech population, a local inflation has made it very difficult for the working poor and artists who had long considered this a home to survive. The service industry here has gotten outright hostile to people it percieves as part of that economy - especially the MBA types (less so the geeks, since we're less into conspicuous consumption, even though we are just as guilty of pushing up rent costs.) Jobs at restaurants and cafes that pay $10 an hour go begging.
  Also good targets for abuse are people who buy and drive SUVs in a crowded city without parking - there was a campaign encouraging locals to vandalize SUVs and luxury cars, partially out of vengeance and partially to scare away the rich arrivers, who are pushing up the cost of living. (It was called the Mission Yuppie Eradication Project.) Another source of contention is the property-tax exemption for so-called live-work spaces. Originally designed to motivate artists to move into troubled neighborhoods and convert industrial space into studio and work space, the vast majority of so-called live-work lofts are new construction that simply is built in an industrial style, which is bought for $200,000 to $600,000 a unit by trendy nouveux riches. Then these people pay no tax into the local school system, while local residents in regular housing (including those of us who rent, since it is part of the cost of renting) pay property tax.
  I see a lot of vaguely guilty sympathy for these anti-tech-yuppie efforts among the creatives of the web industry - after all, many of them had hoped to be artists themselves - as well as among the more thoughtful tech geeks. Most real artists, unless they are very rich or married to someone who is, are leaving the Bay Area; San Francisco is in danger of falling off the art map.