On Sun, 06 Jul 2014 09:10:25 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Sun, 06 Jul 2014 07:33:50 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 05 Jul 2014 22:05:08 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Sat, 05 Jul 2014 23:23:09 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 05 Jul 2014 20:00:13 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Sat, 05 Jul 2014 20:20:04 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 05 Jul 2014 13:22:09 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Sat, 05 Jul 2014 10:05:40 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

That's nice, in the woods.

Yes, quite nice. Do you have problems with mold/mildew because of the
trees in such close proximity?

Thanks. I wanted to buy a house "away from it all" in about 1974. At
the time, only about half of the houses in the neighborhood were
occupied year round. The rest were vacation houses, Section 8
housing, and methamphetamine factories. It was common for the dogs to
sleep in the roadway. That worked well until the 1990's, when living
in the trees was deemed fashionable that everything I was trying to
get away from moved in next door. That's not really bad news as the
local infrastructure has gradually improved over the years, and rising
home prices has introduced a better class of residents. Be careful.
This type of progress can also happen to you.

Larkin? Never. SF is too much of a dump. He's more likely to have a
Google bus parked in his driveway while they pick up the illegal
programmers next door. ;-)

I live in Glen Park, an obscure quiet neighborhood, with a small
village down the hill with a few good restaurants and a dynamite
bakery. Glen Canyon is two blocks away, with a stream and raccoons and
coyotes and hawks and stuff. There are googlites moving in here and
there. Nice people, but they are driving up house prices.

San Francisco is a collection of villages, mostly separated by
geographic features. Different parts are very different.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...lone_Way_1.jpg

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...nny_Lane_2.jpg

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...nyon_Trail.jpg

Not exactly Fishermen's Wharf.

This is Manhattan, too: ;-)

http://travel.nationalgeographic.com...57_600x450.jpg

http://travel.nationalgeographic.com...60_600x450.jpg

http://travel.nationalgeographic.com...55_600x450.jpg

Not exactly Harlem...


I've spent 3 or 4 months of my life in Manhattan, and that's enough.

I've been dragged to plays in Manhattan and that was enough. Oh, then
there was the iApx432 launch (three days). That was *way* more than
enough.

The iApx432 event must have been a hoot. Ditto Itanic. What I don't
understand is how Intel introduced those architectures (super CISC and
then super RISC) and somehow managed to make them slower than x86.
There's got to be stories.

It had its moments but mostly boring. They had silicon there but the
big question of the day was "Huh?". That question was never answered.
....even decades later. Intel is a one-trick pony. Always has been.

SF was much better (parking was the same - nonexistent). The
hookers a couple of blocks from the hotel were funny, far better than
those in Manhattan (even the trannies).

NYC is all concrete and steel and steam. Central Park is much praised
but still awfully civilized.

Civilized? Is that why it's so dangerous?

SF has a small downtown, like a bit of New York, which is what most
visitors see. But it has views, trails, stairways, beaches, cliffs,
tunnels, mountains (well one, almost) if you get a couple of miles
from downtown. We passed Proposition M some years back, which
established height limits that keeps downdown from spreading. I park
on the street at home, no problem.

You do know that there are a *lot* of single-family homes in NYC, too?
Manhattan NYC.

You've got to be a people-person to enjoy New York. You have to
actually own two or three tuxedos. Hang out in art museums.

No, you have to hate people.

We get the Sunday New York Times. It doesn't have comics, but it does
have Style and The Arts, which are even funnier.

The editorial page is even funnier.