That said, I think SF has some unique circumstances that make gentrification challenging. These cause genuine problems that aren't related to simple fear of change. A few of those circumstances:

* SF has a very poor public transport system that severely limits where people can choose to live in relation to their workplace

* SF has problems with homelessness and poverty that are more visible and proportionally higher than its peers (SF has one of the highest rates of homeless people who actively refuse shelter)

* Tech workers often flee the city to have families, meaning they aren't as engaged with the community as others (this exodus also has detrimental effects on the school system in SF)

We're threatening our own existence.

> We're threatening our own existence.

Erm...no. You are choosing to define tech as either " LSD experimenting, sandal wearing, authority deriding rebels." or in another post as "autistic male industry.". This is a definition that works for you. I choose not to be associated with any of these definitions. I have no interest in either craft beer or comicon or any of those typical American nerd past times. Hell, I studied high school in a sub culture where girls were automatically supposed to be good at Math or CS.

My point is that it ultimately is just a job. Go do the job. There will be people who will stereotype you and make you part of some club whether you choose to be part of that club or not. Ignore them, help the world if you choose to.

There will be many benefits if we do, for our society, for our industry, and for us too. In the meantime, you and I will be in the minority.

I was speaking a bit tongue in cheek about the lsd and sandals, but nevertheless believe we need to work hard to encourage a quilt of diversity: in style and scenes, approaches to the world and epistemology of learning, academic pursuit, politics, local business etc. I aimed to identify the low hanging fruit, where we're most of out to lunch. And the lack of women in our midst is certainly #1 on the list, imo.

This is why I disagree with Crito and think the fundamental issue here is economic, not bigotry. The bigotry is just a concentration of vitriol against the offending party, and it morphs to reflect whatever that offending party might look like. There's a lot of emotional pain in being displaced. It's going to create resentment against those who are perceived as doing the displacing.

Those are superficial differences. You know what actually matters? Whether he will defend the reputation of a whistleblower in the face of power. Whether he will fight when he finds out that women are getting paid 15% less in his company. Whether he'll push hard for an environment that prevents managerial abuses. That's the shit that matters, not whether he wears a hoodie vs. a suit.

On the serious moral stuff, the modern incarnation of Silicon Valley is just so fucking conventional and submissive to authority that, as far as I'm concerned, it has forfeit its right to live.

They're carpet-baggers, here for the perceived easy money, because Wall Street gorged itself to bail-out destruction.

I should add that your attitude towards what financial workers are or should be is pretty close minded as well...

We program the machines that affect society in ways that go completely against the ideals of counter-culture.

We are right-hand enablers of the man. Until we aren't needed, that is.

Tech people who can afford commutes are not the cause of poor public transit, they just serve to highlight it. Upper-middle class tech workers are not the reason that there are so many homeless in SF, they just provide start contrast that makes the homeless problem highly visible.

Getting rid of tech people so that these problems are not as apparent is not a well considered solution.

You're right, though, that it's not new at all. This happens in most major urban cities.

It is unreasonable to expect your community to never grow in population or wealth.

Also, I think you are underplaying the degree to which "disliking people with Macbooks at coffee houses" plays into it. There is a lot of wordage in that article dedicated to describing things other than rising rent that is bothering the "natives".

One example:

""Your whole social world is tech," Garcia, 37, said as he finished a bagel sandwich at the Creamery, a cafe at Fourth and Townsend that's a hotbed of tech deal making.

"The reality is that there are real people in San Francisco, but they're usually in neighborhoods like the Richmond or Sunset," he continued. "The wall between them and us, so to speak - not to get too postcolonial about it here - is pretty high.""

Here the "native" has decided that "tech people" are somehow less "real" because they are unlike him. People like Garcia might try to dress up their issue with "tech people" as merely a matter of rent and economics, but what it really boils down to is bigotry.

If I have to put it into words, there's been a tangible shift from "let's do something interesting together with this cool new thing" to "how can I get rich with this thing?", and that transition makes everyone else feel like a tool for your personal advancement.

Yes, exactly. You're hitting it right on the head in this thread.