Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | sergiomattei's commentslogin

> The entire downtown area is just homeless camps.

This isn’t even remotely close to true.

> You can't browse around outside Westlake Center without being bombarded and accosted by aggressive panhandlers. Even the iconic Pike Place Market was overrun with druggies.

I live on Pike Street. There’s homeless, but it’s not “overrun” and for the year+half I’ve lived here I haven’t been “accosted by aggressive panhandlers”. These are areas with constant foot traffic.

Yes 3rd & Pike is bad, but it’s improved since then. Late at night it’s not the best—but it’s never been.

If this is truly your experience, I urge you to visit again. Seattle is a large and beautiful city with a lot to offer.


In general the homeless problem downtown has gotten better but a few hotspots are still bad, notably Chinatown/International District. I used to enjoy taking visitors there until about 5 years ago when a few Asians got their heads bashed in or shot around Chinatown and Belltown. It was a politically inconvenient time to highlight who exactly was attacking Asians, and the issue was swept under the rug. Now we just stay in Bellevue, which luckily seems to be getting all the new Asian small businesses.


I agree, Chinatown/ID took a turn for the worst unfortunately.


I don't know why you're being downvoted. I've lived in the area for nearly 20 years and I agree that his description is far exaggerated. It was true in the depths of the COVID-19 pandemic (when any eviction or forcible displacement of people was prohibited), but not since then. Today, the visibility of homeless encampments in Seattle is roughly the same as it was 20 years ago.


> The homeless encampment problem in Seattle today is roughly now back at the same level of problem we had 20 years ago.

See, this is wild to me. Seattle has a long-time notorious problem with Tent Cities and even now it's just completely normal. I remember The Jungle under I-5 at Beacon Hill was a big problem. I'm sure it still is.


"The Jungle" isn't at all the same now, and is mostly cleared out from its heyday in ca 2018.

The larger problem with "The Jungle" is that nobody can agree on what it means, and where it is. I used to live on Beacon Hill, and the way journalists used the phrase was all over the place. Incidents anywhere from the I-90/I-5 interchange to the camps under I-5 all the way south to Georgetown, to the camps up in the woods in the East Duwamish greenbelt were all called "The Jungle".


This sounds like the perspective of a beat-down Seattlite that thinks all the problems are just "normal". I lived there for a very long time, and have lived in several other major cities since then.

Seattle's problems are not "normal". And they should not be normalized by thinking this is just how it is. It is not that way in other places.


> I lived there for a very long time

It sounds like your last visit was during the COVID-19 pandemic. Homeless encampment conditions in downtown Seattle and throughout the city have much improved since then. Today, visible homelessness is effectively the same as it was back in ~2005.


Deflecting is a fun game, but I won’t play it. I’m challenging your hyperbole here—on the other hand, you’re making assumptions about me.

Explain to me how “the entire downtown area is just homeless tents”. By all means bring some proof of Pike Place being “overrun with druggies”. Get real.


Walk from Pike Place Market, 1st and Pike, east up Pike St toward Capitol Hill. Count the number of homeless camps you see sitting on cardboard boxes in the middle of the sidewalks. All along Pike St, 3rd Ave, 4th Ave. And then count the number of SPD officers you see (ignoring the fanny-pack guys handing out naloxone). You'll get it.


I’m so glad you mention “going up Pike towards Capitol Hill” because I live right on the section where Cap Hill & First Hill starts.

My lived experience is that I could walk the length of Pike from Bellevue Ave towards the waterfront and see two-three tents at most. Homeless yes, but encampments? “Overrun”? “Tent city”?

It’s so easy to make hyperbolic statements and a pain to prove them wrong. I can see how you get away with spouting this nonsense—and people believe it.

Let me know if anyone wants a YouTube video or something, I’ll be glad to take a fun evening stroll and prove you wrong.


Start at Boren Ave and walk down Pike Street. Film it.


You don't even need to film it, it's on Google Maps Street View: https://maps.app.goo.gl/cdyFttFsQPhpBHR48

That street view was filmed taken two months ago, when it was still warm and nice out, so tent activity would've been at its peak.

I wish I had seen your post earlier because I literally walked that stretch of road earlier this evening -- a couple friends of mine from out of town are going to the Patti Smith show at the Paramount tonight and we had drinks nearby. No tents in sight though we did encounter someone walking around with a blanket wrapped around their head. But still, one probable homeless drug addict is hardly "overrun".

It's really not as you describe... I agree things were getting worse in ~2019 and then became way worse during the pandemic, but it's much different now.


Thanks for the link.

In the interest of saving myself an hour of time uploading a video, I’ll attest that yes—that street view is as “average day on Pike” as it gets.

To be clear, there are homeless who walk around the area… and Capitol Hill isn’t exactly the nicest area these days. 3rd and Pike isn’t nice. But Seattle in 2025 isn’t real-life World War Z.

Parent commenter should visit sometime.


A single druggie/hobo is unacceptable in a functional society. Just enforce trespassing laws.


All the west coast port cities (SF, Portland, Tacoma, Seattle, Vancouver) imho have always had a similar s.hole vibe. For most of the last 40 years SF was the worst. But now Seattle has the top place. Clearly complex issue with many causes but also clearly someone in SF did something to improve the situation and someone in Seattle didn't do that thing.


Seattle was highly functional for a while. When the tech industry grew, the region attracted a huge population of people from California and it destroyed the local and state politics. SF policies came to Seattle and in a worse way. SF has at least swung back a tiny bit but Seattle hasn’t, and it’s why there is rampant crime, trash, and encampments.


To clarify, this isn't based on user research or survey results, as other Nielsen Group writeups are.

It's a senior editor's opinion on the UI of iOS 26.


And I’m so glad to see them take a big, glorious L after the changes were back-pedaled a day later.


> Our AI analyzes balance sheets, cash flows, and profitability metrics to deliver executive summaries, risk assessments, and key insights that help you make confident business decisions.RetryClaude can make mistakes. Please double-check responses.

Slight issue on the homepage ;)


#vibecoding


Hey I had an example URL in a README.md with github.com/yourusername. I think this is going to bite me in the ass if anyone checks the commit that fixes it.


What bothers me is the double standard.

When the public asks for fully publicly-owned railways, universal healthcare, or any basic social safety assurances—“socialism”.

When a megacorporation struggles, immediately to the rescue.


Bailouts aren't following some rules of fairness, they're for specific reasons like preventing greater economic problems (2008) or national security (probably Intel). You might disagree that those are the best ways to address those risks but that's why we elect the government to make those decisions and act on them instead of letting the country collapse - which is arguably more important than social services which won't really matter if there's no money to fund them or the country has been taken over by some hostile enemy.


Is like the country is not already collapsing due to lack of social services compared to the supposed enemy which already has higher lifespan while having 10x lower gdp per capita.


Not a serious problem in the same sense that a military conflict would be. Different categories and different concerns.


The US is not “collapsing” and we have plenty of social services.

Our lifespan is lower because we’re fat.


Isn't that because of deaths of despair, namely by drugs? Why are there so many desperate people in the US if the country is doing ok?


And because of gun violence.


That’s fine. But when the gov is picking winners and losers, that not a free market. What it is, it is. But it’s not a free market based system.


> Bailouts aren't following some rules of fairness

And people wonder why populism came back. Huge transfers of wealth aren't about 'fairness', its about preventing greater economic problems that the people who received the bailout say will happen if they don't get bailed out.

At the end of the day, this line of thought is going to fuck over the country far more than any depression would.


It's the same line of thought that says countries should subsidize local agriculture. The alternative would be greater specialization in food production and greater risks if those specialized countries fail to provide for their dependants. No doubt there's some influence of farmers trying to get wealth transferred to themselves but that doesn't mean it doesn't also benefit the rest of the population.


One big difference is management control. People feel that government administered services tend to have poor management and citizen services more often than not. One big example is the DMV since almost every has experience dealing with it, long queue times are almost universal because no one gives a crap and it's very hard to fire a government employee. Or the passport issuance, or applying for permits. Or unemployment benefits, the list goes on and on.

Imagine if the DMV and passport services had even the possibility of competition like a private company has. You bet all of a sudden the service would get much faster and better and with fewer mistakes and red tape with the same or fewer number of employees. Or someone would set up a competitor and imagine how many people would even pay extra just to not waste several hours of their time.

It's tax payer money so there is a lot more waste than even at big private companies. For example, the costs to just administer and operate the social security administration(not including any money paid out to recipients) is $15 billion dollars with a big B. There is no incentive for anyone to save the tax payer any money and there would be a huge pushback from govt contractors, unions and employeees. See how much hate DOGE gets for even proposing cuts or higher efficiencies.

Any large IT project in the government in almost any country and at any goverment costs huge amounts while not returning much value if any. Look at the state and costs of local metro stations and trains in almost any city.


That's interesting example to choose, as I've actually heard often that the Social Security administration is an example of an efficient government administration.

For example, a quick Google search shows administrative overhead as around 0.5% of benefits: https://www.cbpp.org/research/social-security/top-ten-facts-...


Just one instance.

https://fedscoop.com/problem-project-threatens-progress-soci...

> The program, called the Disability Case Processing System, or DCPS, was designed to improve case processing and enhance customer service. But six years and $288 million later the program has “delivered limited functionality and faced schedule delays as well as increasing stakeholder concerns

For the main system they're still using COBOL, which has no Date data type, causing issues even in 2025.


Have you read the book "Recoding America"?

I have a feeling you might enjoy that book as it goes into a LOT of detail about government dysfunction with respect to software.

I found the book eye opening and personally it provided me with some new perspective.


> See how much hate DOGE gets for even proposing cuts or higher efficiencies.

I don't think many people believed DOGE was ever intended to improve government efficiency in any real sense.


> See how much hate DOGE gets for even proposing cuts or higher efficiencies

I think you should be aware that “proposing cuts” is not why people why DOGE got hate. I find it disappointing that serious people believe that.


Well, my local DMV is much more efficient and friendly than the private health insurance company I have to deal with.

But part of that is lack of competition. I can't really switch to a different insurance company, because the one I am with is heavily subsidized by my employer.


In my entire life, I spent much less time in DMV offices than on the line calling AT&T's customer support.

USPS has also been great overall.


I switched away from AT&T. You even keep your number. Switching govt services not an option unless you take more extreme measures.

> USPS has also been great overall

USPS is an independent agency which is funded by its own fees charged to users, not taxpayer money. It's not like the other agencies.

From Wiki:

> The USPS is often mistaken for a state-owned enterprise or government-owned corporation (e.g., Amtrak) because it operates much like a business

It's also far from a monopoly unlike most other govt agencies and has competition in the form of UPS, Fedex, DHL, Amazon etc.

So it's not surprising that it runs better, if it loses user fees, it directly affects the bottomline and thus would have to downsize, no blank check from the taxpayer like other agencies have.


> I switched away from AT&T. You even keep your number. Switching govt services not an option unless you take more extreme measures.

I can vote for a politician to fix the government services. And the local politicians know that keeping the government running well enough is needed to be re-elected.

I have zero leverage on AT&T.

Some services can be government-operated or private. Trash collection is one of them, for example. I lived in many cities, and municipal trash collection companies were always better and not any more expensive.


> I can vote for a politician to fix the government services. And the local politicians know that keeping the government running well enough is needed to be re-elected

That is one issue among several reasons to pick a politician. Also politicians have limited powers to fire non-performers which gets bogged down in the court system to fire just one person.

> I have zero leverage on AT&T.

People can switch away easier from companies, it happens all the time, companies lose and gain customers all the time. Bad or mediocre service has killed many companies, the effect is far greater than on governments because they get to fund themselves from you even if you don't like or want them. Govt is the ultimate monopoly.


How do you switch away from a company that has a monopoly in your area?


You're on a forum for startup founders. Found a startup.


> One big example is the DMV since almost every has experience dealing with it, long queue times are almost universal because no one gives a crap and it's very hard to fire a government employee.

I don't know what's wrong with the US, but here in Poland, there are hardly any queues at the (equivalent of) DMV. And we're nowhere near US's wealth levels, so public services here (in Poland) should be worse, not better. There's something very wrong in how the US is organizing its DMVs, if the queues are such an universal problem. But, it's not an issue with government services per se, just with this one instance of government service.


And BTW, I agree that Social Security overhead is unacceptable. It should be privatized and increased to at least $500 billion to be comparable with health insurance companies.

It's not acceptable at all to make private companies look bad.


If it was a company it'd have failed already.

> The program, called the Disability Case Processing System, or DCPS, was designed to improve case processing and enhance customer service. But six years and $288 million later the program has “delivered limited functionality and faced schedule delays as well as increasing stakeholder concerns

https://fedscoop.com/problem-project-threatens-progress-soci...

And that's just one instance.

Can you imagine raising $288 million from VCs for a software application while delivering so little?

But taxpayer money? Free and easy money to keep wasting coz no one cares. Tragedy of the commons.

For the main system they're also using COBOL, which has no Date data type, causing issues even in 2025.


Startup companies blow through hundreds of millions of VC dollars with little to show for it all the time. Theranos raised $700 million for a technology that never worked. Plenty of others wasted hundreds of millions building half-baked products that nobody wanted or that made no business sense. Remember Quibi?


The difference is that those companies eventually fail. The govt has essentially limitless taxpayer money behind it(till a currency crisis like Argentina, Greece etc. happens taking down the entire economy) because paying it is enforced by threat of violence and it can borrow and print money as much as it wants with deficit spending.

Also Theranos was aiming for something very innovative that still does not exist, whereas the govt IT systems are essentially glorified CRUD apps(no doubt complicated and with tricky integrations and need for reliability and security). It's an example where VCs could've exerted more scrutiny but chose not to and wasted their own money, hopefully a lesson learnt. As taxpayers, we have far fewer options, we cannot just pass on paying out hard earned money if we don't want to "invest".

Another example, the Queensland payroll system cost $1.2 billion over 8 years to develop, repair and maintain, to pay just 87K people. The initial estimated budget? $6.9 million.


> Also Theranos was aiming for something very innovative that still does not exist, whereas the govt IT systems are essentially glorified CRUD apps(no doubt complicated and with tricky integrations and need for reliability and security).

I worked both in the area of molecular biology and bioinformatics with some pretty nifty technology (which was later acquired by a large company). And in the area of giant ERP applications that are nothing but tons of boring forms.

I can confidently say that the complexity of ERP apps dwarfs anything that is needed for molecular biology.


>Can you imagine raising $288 million from VCs for a software application while delivering so little?

Yes, absolutely. I think you might be overestimating VC’s a little bit.


It can happen yes, but VCs have very strong incentives to not waste their own money, if they feel like putting the effort into it. If they fail they may learn the lesson not to waste money, or even end up not having money to waste. In the government all the incentives are the opposite, to keep spending money or the budget would get reduced next year. If anyone tries to save costs, they make a lot of enemies both within and outside. They get nothing if they succeed, so the incentives are bad.


I think you may have a flawed understanding of how VCs work. VCs generally care little for one company does. That’s what the whole “invest in 500 startups” strategy is about. Now a $200M investment probably starts to leave that range and enters the “throw weight around to win”, but generally they care little about the software except as a means to an end to get returns and business growth and software value are only loosely correlated.


> Can you imagine raising $288 million from VCs for a software application while delivering so little?

What? You're imagining VCs caring about pizza money? Should I mention, perhaps, the AOL-TimeWarner merger? Or maybe AT&T buying DirecTV for $50B and essentially giving it away for $8B?

Heck, I was a part of an utterly failed project with a $150m budget (in 2005), in a large European company.

> For the main system they're also using COBOL, which has no Date data type, causing issues even in 2025.

And? They haven't missed a single payment day in all their existence, moving data between multiple types of media. While working with staff levels that won't even qualify as "skeleton" in plenty of companies.


> Heck, I was a part of an utterly failed project with a $150m budget (in 2005), in a large European company

Was it a just a somewhat complex CRUD app like the SSA example or most govt IT projects? Or were you guys trying for something more complicated and innovative and failed?


It was an ERP application from a large three-letter European company. In other words, a CRUD app with lots of UI forms. Nothing innovative or particularly interesting.

The hardware to deploy it was alone a couple of million. At least, I got to play with some rather cool gear (for that time).


It’s not a double standard, you just don’t understand the standard.


It’s a triple standard you just can’t count.


This is absurd. I’ve learned so much from having an LLM tutor me as a I go through a dense book, for example.


Iran being an authoritarian regime is not new.


This! Great work and keep going :)


Shouldn't this dev be compensated for their ongoing labor and cloud computing costs?


Hi, this looks great! Any plans to support Azure OpenAI as a backend?


Hey! We can add this pretty easily! We find that Gemini Pro 2.5 works the best as the planner model by a good margin, but we definitely want to support a variety of providers. I'll keep this in mind and implement soon!

edit: tracking here https://github.com/magnitudedev/magnitude/issues/6


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

Search: