not a very good long-term solution for a real problem. as the article says, a more productive approach is to ask, "how do you hack San Francisco's homelessness problem?"
But letting homeless people into Noisebridge to sleep, eat, and dispose of bodily waste is not a solution to the problem of homelessness. It just turns Noisebridge into an outpost of the Tenderloin. No one wants to work in that kind of environment, and suddenly the central justification for Noisebridge's existence would have been put aside to build an inadequate homeless shelter for the month or two before dues-money runs out and the space is closed up.
Building up communities isn't magic. It takes work, bonds of trust, responsibility, and more work. The resources used to build up an institution can't be deployed willy-nilly. Organizations centrally devoted to homelessness don't take the naive solution of letting homeless people sleep in all their offices and bedrooms: it's not only pointless but would destroy the organization. Why should Noisebridge sap its own capabilities to deal with problems that it's well-suited for solving in favor of doing something no homeless advocate would suggest?
interesting how in future, when time will weather out a lot of details, people will look back at our time and see huge amount of dwellings - offices - going empty at night while some people would sleep under bridges, on the streets, etc... Was it a personal choice of these people, were they punished, banned from the society or was it a society without empathy? One can imagine various archaeo-socio-logical PhD-s.
a more sincere argument would be, "it's not my problem or noisebridge's problem, but there ought to be something to solve that problem, so let's think about how to solve it - rather than simply stating 'it's not my problem' and burying our heads in the sand".
Not really... it is undebatably the "government's problem" (certainly local/city, perhaps state and federal). Furthermore, it is the problem of any organization that has 'helping the homeless' in their mission statement, of which there are many.
I've been to plenty of other spaces and it can be a cool scene, but Noisebridge's reputation isn't good.
I do go there specifically to meet up with people, and I do occasionally hang out on the FreeNode IRC channel, but thats about it these days.
I still love the concept of Noisebridge and it needs to exist, but I am not really a participant there right now.
I arrived in the middle of a confrontation that almost turned violent. I can't see how anyone could get work done in such a space but maybe I'm just an old fogie. The experience made me really appreciate what I have.
Lemme guess: Lisp vs Haskell?
Yes. I'm that old.
Hurkle versus Mugwump versus Wumpus for the trifecta?
1. No TVs allowed on premise - Gets rid of slackers, stoners and people who don't like to work.
2. No alcohol - Gets rid of endless trouble and alcoholics.
3. People must shower on a regular basis - Gets rid of the mentally ill.
It is hard for me to type the above statement without laughing, but I
If Soylent can find a market, surely there's a market for housing for hackers.
(It sounds like this isn't really quite the problem Noisebridge faces, but it's what it made me think of.)
I wonder if someone could use the zillow api (or something in the open) in someway to deduce spaces/homes where people could invoke adverse possession and somehow work it into concepts of hackerspaces as far as funding and usage is concerned (maybe with some support of local communities as far as outreach and image is concerned), but with more lax requirements when it comes to allowing people to habitate.
IANAL, so all the specifics of how it would work out are hazy to me.
In here you will find so many overly tenant-friendly rules and rights that unless you can afford a really great lawyer to help you navigate them, it's easy for small time landlords to get screwed over hard. This probably means you.
I'm sure these rules were all instituted for good reasons, but IMO they've become an inane and insane entitlement
I witnessed their effect personally some years ago when one of the creators of bittorrent invoked the Ellis Act on an ex-girlfriend of mine who wanted to take the top floor of her house off the rental market. He nearly drove her to bankruptcy.
I'm not saying this is what always happens, but just seeing it occur once is more than enough to persuade one to never ever even consider being a landlord there.
This is just an idea I had in the moment though, but in my eyes, banks will give the most push back, though I'm sure some kinda of deal could be made if mutual ground can be found.
Even if the above were not true, or the debts could be forgiven, the buyer would still be responsible for property taxes, which means they'd need a revenue stream to avoid the government coming to repossess the land. That could be hard to work up.
And to address the how to pay for it aspect, it would raise income like other hacker spaces through "members" (among other ideas the community who works/habitates there decides to do through whatever entity that is the claimant of adverse possession).
Here's my personal favorite example that I descended upon only to balk at all the offers already in place: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2011/01/11_offers_and_27_...
That said, you never know until you know...
I can agree with what you are saying, but I propose that maybe (having never been/lived in SF) that the types places agents are looking for (quick flips? and off the market for reasons mentioned already) and the types of places that might be suitable for hackerspace group ltd|org|corp|llc (enclosed and with a roof and off the market for reasons mentioned already), if one were to make a venn diagram there would be at least one third agents havent been looking at (maybe less so in sf than in other areas in the country).
Or proposed another way, how many homes are being knocked down by banks (and in SF to be relevant)?
I'm asking friends who are involved in real estate (not in sf), because talking about this more has got me more interested to see who else I know is up for trying something.