X is closing San Francisco HQ and relocating staffers to San Jose

Re:X is closing San Francisco HQ and relocating staffers to ... by SirMaster on Wednesday August 07, 2024 @10:06AM (#41181619)

Why should crime proximity to my location be completely ignored?

If the crime is higher per person, but the crimes are several miles away then why would that be a problem for me?

Compared to lower crimes per person, but the crimes are happening on my street.

If the crimes are happening closer to me I'm more likely to be affected by it in some way.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:X is closing San Francisco HQ and relocating staffers to ... by aqme28 on Thursday August 08, 2024 @09:23AM (#41191215)

This is backwards.

Higher rate per person means it is literally more likely to happen to you.

High rate per area but low rate per person means I guess that you're more likely to be a witness. Low rate per area but high rate per person means you're likely to be a victim.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:X is closing San Francisco HQ and relocating staffers to ... by SirMaster on Thursday August 08, 2024 @01:57PM (#41194370)

I am not only concerned about being a victim though. I don't want to be anywhere near it. I think I should be allowed to have that kind of a desire and preference.

I also think that whether or not you end up being a victim has a lot more to do than simply crimes per person.

I don't think whether you end up a victim is evenly distributed to every single person.

I think that the way you live and act and guard against things can affect your personal chances differently and that physical proximity can end up playing a role.

[ Parent | on HN ]