[huac]

“On the plus side we’ll no longer be homeless and we’l [sic] be able to focus on building what we’re building.”

Does anyone else feel uncomfortable when SF tech workers, in this case a CEO of an acquired startup, talk about homelessness in this way? Trivializing a very real problem to nothing more than a 'headache' or 'distraction' from the greater goal of, I guess, funding more startups?

[csallen]

No, because I believe the use of analogy and hyperbole are obvious enough that one would have to intentionally misinterpret this statement as trivializing homelessness in order to take offense.

[visakanv]

> Does anyone else feel uncomfortable when SF tech workers, in this case a CEO of an acquired startup, talk about homelessness in this way?

I recognize it as a tone-deaf thing to say, probably from someone who's never actually experienced real homelessness. But I also recognize that there's no malice in the statement. Language isn't a universal thing, and different words mean different things to different people. I wouldn't pick a fight over it.

People unintentionally trivialize others all the time without meaning to; I'm sure I've done it myself in the past week. The challenge (I think) is to be sensitive to it but also to not be too self-righteous about it.

[tdb7893]

He is talking about how his company literally didn't have an office and the tone wasn't derogatory in any way so it doesn't bother me.

[strong_code]

I live in the same building as Ryan, and while I do not know his personal financial situation, I know that he isn't scraping the bottom of the barrel in regards to apartment rents. The average rent of a unit in my building is ~$2500.

[orky56]

It just contributes to the disconnect PH & SV have to the bigger issues at their doorstep.