Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

It sounds like you're treating an Apple building downtown differently than any other skyscraper. It's still just a big tower filled with people. Are you saying that SF is literally bursting at the seams and that it can't support another big office tower? What about the giant Transbay development plan? If you're going to stuff 12,000+ people anywhere, it's better to do it in an already dense area to take advantage of efficiencies.

Green Metropolis is an interesting read about big cities and sustainability: http://www.amazon.com/Green-Metropolis-Smaller-Driving-Susta...




Yes. That is what I am saying. That even if Apple could make the building itself as green as conceivably possible, simply moving 12,000 people's workplaces to the city of San Francisco would create additional problems and be a net negative.

If you want to call that "bursting at the seams" that's fine, but Apple isn't in a position to reengineer the whole dysfunctional city of San Francisco.


> Apple isn't in a position to reengineer the whole dysfunctional city of San Francisco.

I'm imagining what San Francisco reengineered by Apple would be like. Somewhere on the same continuum as Disneyworld and the Las Vegas strip, but with rounded edges, lots of greenery and a social order similar to Singapore.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: