I wish I was there when this piece came it at priceonomics. Aside from some price comparisons, I didn't feel that it really got into the economics of the market, and how it might be skewed on the streets, what operating constraints exist.
It would have been interesting to see if there was support in this study for the iron law of prohibition, which states that the harder the laws, the harder the drugs.
Vice did a great job of showing this in the economies of illegal alcohol sales in the Canadian Territories, where people wanted to drink beer, but ended up drinking vodka instead, and they wanted to drink a little bit of it, but ended up being forced to drink a lot.
Unintended consequences is always fascinating reporting, as it would have been here.
As to the side effects of the tech industry on drug us, all I can say is that in my volunteer work at City Team, I see it everyday. And I think it's intentional. I think it's part hazing, part group dynamics, and part social psychopath testing, that alcohol and drugs play such a large role in most all the tech companies that I consult with.
And if that concerns you, consider volunteering at a place like City Team as well. They need help every night.
At first I was surprised at the amount of speed and opiates consumed around the Bay Area. Weed and psychedelics seem reasonable given the population, but the more I think about it, the more it makes sense: impressionable kids straight out of college are thrust into extremely fast-paced work lives with too little wisdom and too much cash, so it seems like a natural continuation of the college mindset, i.e., cramming with addy and winding down with weed, by keeping up with coke and numbing down with Vicodin or heroin. The concept of work-life balance approaches insanity in the valley. I'm glad that I left, and I haven't looked back.
I think Silicon Valley is more like Wall Street than they realize. It seems more and more like a playground for the rich where you tough it out for a few years before your resume will let you work wherever you'd like, because unless you're loaded, I can't imagine how anyone would raise children there. Can't be too good for long-term employee loyalty...
San Francisco is the only place I've ever seen custom glass funnels for sale at headshops.
SF is also the only place I've ever seen flyers advertising a Whipit delivery service (nitrous oxide).
Generally speaking SF seems to be much more loose with drug use than other cities in CA - although I will say, from what I've seen, the use of pharmaceuticals like benzos and adderal seem to be treated as lightly as alcohol these days.
If you only gathered the same data on a regular basis, then you might have a startup on your hands. The name should somehow incorporate Fear and Loathing. You'd also want metrics for addiction, (in)ability to carry on everyday activities, etc. and graph that to find the sweet spot for best bang for the buck. Possible integration with Siri, Cortana, Google Now, etc. "Siri, I want to get high." "Sure, just see Terry on Market St. He's got some snow at a great price. For your current body weight, you should buy 5 grams to have a good time tonight."
I once priced a variety of scales on Amazon and for weeks afterward the stream of recommended products that Amazon shows at the bottom of the page became polluted with all sorts of drug paraphernalia that Amazon sells.
My takeaway is that drug dealers/users use Amazon to buy their supplies just like anyone else. It makes sense, I mean, why wouldn't they?
I was at a punk bar in Boston, and, a little drunk, walked up to one of the scarier-looking punks and asked about his jacket. He told me how he spiked the entire thing, put in the studs, and sewed on all the patches. I asked "where did you get the spikes?" he replied "Amazon, mate!"
>"[...]or because of the stress of these tech jobs they start doing cocaine to stay up and oxycodone to relax. Working 80-hour weeks and making crazy money extracts a terrible toll on you."
How the fuck is this acceptable? How are inhumane workloads like these legal?
The impression I get is that SF is a place to work, not a place to live. You go there, become deeply involved in tech, learn from your surroundings and level up your skills, and then move on. There are no women to distract you, immigrant-hostile natives to chase you back to campus, and campuses that provide a perfect environment for you to focus on tech.
It's certainly not an environment that everyone would like - neither is USMC bootcamp, a PhD program or an MMA gym. Why should that be illegal?
To quote Marge Simpson (regarding watching MMA): "Call me a killjoy, but I think that because this is not to my taste, no one else should be able to enjoy it."
I really like the MMA analogy, because it makes it so easy to illustrate why this environment is a problem. Ronda Rousey earned my respect not for her fighting, but for her very explicit awareness that MMA will damage her, and there is a limited amount of fighting she can do before quitting. So she picks fights to maximize her income as she destroys herself. Fighters know they are trading long-term health for money. It is part of the game.
Working in tech in SF, and the other scenarios mentioend, are the same thing - you are putting yourself into an unhealthy environment, in exchange for specific benefits, usually cash, but sometimes for more non-tangible benefits to your life, or simply because you believe in it.
If that is the choice people make, that is fine. People should have the freedom to make those kinds of choices as they direct their lives. But what worries me is that some young people are jumping into these situations without realizing it.
As with everything in life, a conscious choice to follow a path is a good thing, and will be respected. But falling into something without realizing the downsides can be dangerous.
>To quote Marge Simpson (regarding MMA): "Call me a killjoy, but I think that because this is not to my taste, no one else should be able to enjoy it."
Actions in hyper-competitive SV have a ripple effect on the rest of tech economy globally. If the only way to compete in tech is to use performance enhancing drugs, well that's exactly the sort of situation where I'd want the government to step in with regulation. I don't want to have to use drugs in order to stay competitive. It's a health issue, similar to professional sports and drug use. Performance enhancing drugs are banned for the health of the athletes, not for the "spirit of the game."
Athletics is a zero sum game - the athletes are harmed and the rest of the world is not helped. If we ban PEDs, the football will still reach the endzone.
Tech is a positive sum game. If PEDs help get us the next Uber, AirBnB or OkCupid, it's well worth the price of some less dedicated people being outcompeted. It's insane to hold the world back simply so certain less dedicated developers can maintain their current high status.
No, it's insane to sit back and let the market force people to disfigure and destroy themselves for the profits of wealthy capitalists: to destroy humanity in order to sacrifice it at the altar of capitalism
Exactly. Saying that "oh this was always the way in tech, and always will be" is turning a blind eye to the costs involved. It's gonna turn Silicon Valley into another Wall Street, never mind that the work conditions and pace that drive Wall Street shouldn't be acceptable either.
I don't think you really mean "SF". What you are describing sounds like the tech industry, and even then a small slice of it. There are many women, and immigrant-hostile natives, and even immigrant-friendly natives for that matter, in the SF Bay Area.
It's a wonderful place to live actually, and to raise kids, as long as you can afford the cost of a good standard of living here.
And despite what the article connotes, most people in tech are not using illegal drugs frequently or ever.
> And despite what the article connotes, most people in tech are not using illegal drugs frequently or ever.
I don't think the article suggests most tech workers are doing this, but I think you'd be surprised at the amount that are. Bear in mind that in an office environment, it's hard to tell who is a user and who isn't. I'm a heroin addict, but I don't have 'Junkie' tattooed on my forehead, instead I work at a startup, commit code to GitHub, and go to conferences just like everyone else. I would also agree that it's a problem, and for one other reason that I think the article missed.
If you're unemployed or working a low-end job, and want to quit an addiction, nobody cares if you disappear for a month to detox at a friends house out of town, or something like that. With a tech job, perhaps in a startup or other stressful environment, the responsibilities and pressures that come with it mean you can't just stop. You need the drugs to stay functional and keep working, there are people and businesses relying on your output. For example, if I were just to stop taking heroin now, then withdrawl means I couldn't work for quite some time, maybe a month or two, and there's no way I can just drop all my projects like that. So if you stop taking drugs you'll lose your job, or worse - word might get around that you ended up in rehab, and no more working in the industry...
So it's a little more complicated than they make out.
It's not just acceptable, it's encouraged. It's the goal. It's startup nirvana.
Quoth your startup god king:
Hoffman travels three or four times a year to China, LinkedIn’s fastest-growing market, and he is impressed by the Chinese work ethic. He told one conference audience about a startup in Beijing that was able to ship its first product in just six months, by renting a block of hotel rooms and requiring all employees to live there, taking breaks only to eat, sleep, and exercise.
I'll take your outrage at face value and answer thusly: Adults can make decisions for themselves that you wouldn't make for yourself, and this is not only acceptable, it is vastly preferable to a world with only you making the decisions.
SF is such a farce. Massive destruction and decomposition of society through drugs on one side, massively insane and irrational wealth and valuations and tech talent on the other.
It would have been interesting to see if there was support in this study for the iron law of prohibition, which states that the harder the laws, the harder the drugs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_prohibition
Vice did a great job of showing this in the economies of illegal alcohol sales in the Canadian Territories, where people wanted to drink beer, but ended up drinking vodka instead, and they wanted to drink a little bit of it, but ended up being forced to drink a lot.
You can watch it here -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIhUhHbTJ_s
Unintended consequences is always fascinating reporting, as it would have been here.
As to the side effects of the tech industry on drug us, all I can say is that in my volunteer work at City Team, I see it everyday. And I think it's intentional. I think it's part hazing, part group dynamics, and part social psychopath testing, that alcohol and drugs play such a large role in most all the tech companies that I consult with.
And if that concerns you, consider volunteering at a place like City Team as well. They need help every night.