[zaphod12]

The author notes most of the reasons why 'Move to SF' isn't great advice, but then totally disregards them.

Maybe having to worry about stepping on a syringe isn't a way that someone wants to live! Maybe it's healthy to meet and associate with people who aren't in tech! Maybe you can get a great job working for one of those world class companies and still get 5 job offers a week - they're all from recruiting agencies, anyhow - and live somewhere far more livable (Austin, Boston or Raleigh come to mind quickly).

Can't argue with the weather, though. Damn, Northern California has amazing weather.

[Altimor]

(OP) Yeah maybe I should have made my position more explicit regarding these downsides. I think they're real and annoying; but all cities have their downsides (eg Paris is gloomy all the time and people are insanely grumpy), and that getting a 100-200% salary increase is worth suffering the dirty streets and dysfunctional public infrastructure.

[tjr225]

Funny that you're being downvoted. These issues are very real in many parts of the country(other cities have drug problems, expensive housing, homelessness, traffic) and yet SF bears the brunt of these criticisms. Anyway - I agree - I don't live in SF but it is a pretty awesome city and I have loved every moment I have spent there.

It's just the center of attention, I guess. It's almost as if people expect SF to not have the realities of city life? I'm all for progress and solving problems though - don't get me wrong....

[panopticon]

> These issues are very real in many parts of the country(other cities have drug problems, expensive housing, homelessness, traffic) and yet SF bears the brunt of these criticisms.

Most of my "metro" experience comes from the midwest (Chicago, Minneapolis/St Paul, Kansas City) and maybe it doesn't count for much, but moving to the Bay Area was like taking those city-living annoyances and putting them on steroids. I can completely understand why SF takes the brunt of the criticisms.

[tjr225]

A bit off topic, but I lived in Kansas City for a couple years. I heard gunshots almost every night. There were shootings, stabbings on an almost monthly basis down in Westport. The library branch my wife worked at had a bullet go through the window while she was working there. I saw a dead body on 71 south headed down to my Cerner office as a result of a roving gun battle on the highway. Not to mention the weather.

While the issues may have been hidden from a lot of people living and working outside of KC proper and shielded from the eastside...KC has an insane amount of problems esp wrt gun violence and segregation. Now I have never had the chance to live in San Fransisco, but I would've jumped at the chance to leave KC for SF...and I'm the kind of person who would always choose to deal with midtown KC's issues than to move to the 'burbs.

Edit: A cursory search to try and back up what I am getting at: https://bismarcktribune.com/news/national/the-cities-with-th...

Comically enough, Kansas City shows up on this list twice due to the state boundary. Anyway - most of these cities are back east. I would take being harassed by a couple hobos, tents, and the occasional human turd over sky-high homicide rates any day - though from what I gather Oakland compares to midwestern cities in this regard.

[panopticon]

I suppose I wasn't lumping crime into the "annoyances" category, but yeah I heard gunshots fairly regularly in KC too. I wasn't living out in OP (not to start a JoCo flame war lol).

I'm outside SF now (down in San Jose). I still hear gunshots from time to time, but the crime rate (both violent and non-violent) is way lower than it was back in KC.

[burlesona]

I have lived in SF, Raleigh, and Austin and I would take either of their weather over SF.

SF has chilly fog, high wind, and no sun or sky for 200 days a year. Miserable.

I hear that South Bay is completely different, and I occasionally trek down there on the weekends just to get a few hours sunlight. It seems a lot better.

And I don’t even live out by the ocean, I’m technically not in the crazy fog zone.

I like living here overall but to me the weather is NOT a selling point.

[kstrauser]

> SF has chilly fog, high wind, and no sun or sky for 200 days a year.

San Francisco averages 259 sunny days per year: https://www.bestplaces.net/climate/city/california/san_franc...

I honestly don't know what you're talking about.

[burlesona]

I’ve looked up sources for that before and I believe they use the airport and sometimes a weather station on Rincon Hill. Some of those also don’t count the marine layer (is the fog). That’s probably twice as many sunny days as Alamo Square (middle of the city near me) and three times as many as Sunset or anything on the pacific side of town.

You can get a better picture of this on http://fog.today which has a tool showing historic cloud cover including the marine layer.

[kstrauser]

Sure, but most of the people SF / Oakland don't live in Sunset. Saying that SF's weather is dismal just isn't true for the majority who live and work here. Which isn't to say that everyone experiences glorious weather daily, to be sure, but it's pretty nice for most people.

[burlesona]

I’m saying SF’s weather is dismal to me. I’m not saying anything about the rest of the Bay Area, or to people who like not seeing the sun from May 15 to August 15 each year.

[jefftk]

San Francisco is famous for its microclimates, where it can be sunny in one area but cold and foggy a short walk away.

[sxates]

It depends. If you live in the Sunset neighborhood that's not true - in SOMA, yes.

[akhilcacharya]

I grew up in Raleigh..I love it but the weather is anything but good IMO. Too cold in the winters and too hot in the summers.

I did an internship in Seattle and enjoyed the weather there more myself.

[d1zzy]

I agree, I can't stand SF weather but love South Bay weather. Every time I have to do the drive to SF for some concert I whine about it :)

[freewilly1040]

This is not true for most SF neighborhoods, and not true for basically any east bay neighborhoods.

[gumby]

Go to Silicon Valley instead -- no syringes and no fog. Of course it's the suburbs, so most people will have to drive.

And more tech-focused (apple, google, FB of course, but also robots, various hardware and life sciences companies...not as many people selling socks online as up in SF).

[evilolive]

But with a lot fewer interesting things to do after hours, when done writing software

[gumby]

I spend a lot of time outdoors. But you can also go to the city.

[xkcd-sucks]

I hate to break it to you, but Boston is full of junkies and housing is prohibitively expensive. Also, the weather is nasty, and the people that don't work in tech work in pharma. In the Bay area, one could at least survive the winter in an uninsulated car or tent

[thrmsforbfast]

Interestingly, I've always hated winter and pined for NorCal weather. But I'm really looking forward to the serenity of dark, cold, snowy streets this year.

We'll see how I feel in February, of course...

[harlanji]

The Sunset is Lit. No need to keep it a secret, it’s just not trendy enough yet. Right down to tech unawareness and wide open 280 commutes, it’s a different place.