←back to thread

Airbnb will build a new tech hub in Atlanta

(www.protocol.com)
140 points 7d7n | 5 comments | 18 Feb 21 16:23 UTC | HN request time: 0.615s | source
Show context
pratik661 ◴[18 Feb 21 17:01 UTC] No.26182359[source]▶
I grew up in metro Atlanta and studied at Georgia Tech. The state government subsidizes college education for grads with a certain GPA (HOPE Scholarship). However, I (and most CS grads I knew) left Atlanta for better paying jobs in NYC/Bay Area/Seattle/Austin. I always wondered why the ATL tech scene was 'underdeveloped' compared to comparable sized cities like Seattle and Austin, despite having major research institutions (Georgia Tech and Emory) to anchor it.

This is what I mean by 'underdeveloped':

- Most software dev job postings (as of May 2018) have SPECIFIC tech stack requirements. This to me is a red flag. Most recruiters in 'developed' tech cities assume that software development skills are transferable and that technology stacks/frameworks/languages can be learned.

- The salaries offered were still very low compared to comparable COL locations like Austin

- No major FAANG presence to put upward pressure on local developer wages

replies(14): >>26182424 #>>26182453 #>>26182607 #>>26182952 #>>26183122 #>>26183172 #>>26183431 #>>26185995 #>>26186002 #>>26186101 #>>26186104 #>>26186504 #>>26188019 #>>26188376 #
nkozyra ◴[18 Feb 21 17:08 UTC] No.26182453[source]▶
You could say this of most metros. The most glaring is Boston, which is an international hub for tech education but isn't really competitive with the cities you list, at least relative to its educational reputation.

When I think of NYC, SF, Austin, Seattle, I think of cities with robust arts/culture/dining/entertainment, accessibility (public transit) and enough professional basis to allow job mobility. These things entice younger people to congregate.

There are other metros that have great education and in particular tech education (Raleigh/Durham, Pittsburgh, Chicago) but don't tend to build up tech industries.

replies(4): >>26182507 #>>26182711 #>>26182883 #>>26182915 #
finiteseries ◴[18 Feb 21 17:26 UTC] No.26182711[source]▶
Austin doesn’t fill a single one of those criteria for what it’s worth.

I have never lived somewhere with less public transportation, art & culture, dining, and entertainment options than Austin, Texas.

And I’ve spent my entire life in the American south. Houston for example of all places, does twice as much on all of those qualities!

replies(4): >>26182994 #>>26183282 #>>26184100 #>>26187616 #
1. aeoleonn ◴[18 Feb 21 19:08 UTC] No.26184100[source]▶
I'm leaving Austin for the West Coast.

Not enough outdoor activities here. The amount of hiking trails is great for Texas. But not at the national scale or when compared to the West Coast & northern Rockies.

Texas is mostly private land, so there just aren't any greenbelts (that I know of, within 2 hours of Austin) where you can hike for 10-40 miles one way.

I'm strongly leaning towards Washington for that reason-- Huge "parks" (more like "wilderness zones") for hiking, as well as ocean kayaking, ocean sailing, and ocean fishing.

It's a cheap flight to Alaska from there. And WA is the only contiguous west coast state without state income tax.

replies(2): >>26186167 #>>26186479 #
2. jupiter90000 ◴[18 Feb 21 21:51 UTC] No.26186167[source]▶
Washington has a ton of cool outdoors stuff. Just be ready to have maybe max a couple months of great weather per year to enjoy it (unless you don't mind overcast and drizzle, or forest fire smoke in summer). Also competing with the other 4+ million people in Seattle metro to get it in out there. Amazing diversity of things to do though.
replies(2): >>26186600 #>>26187352 #
3. subsubzero ◴[18 Feb 21 22:16 UTC] No.26186479[source]▶
I flew to Austin back in 2013, spent a week looking at places and checking out hiking areas and running. I loved the food/friendly people but that was about all. For me it was a dealbreaker on lack of trails/wilderness, and also the very high humidity there. In addition housing was expensive as I looked at a few condos and they were roughly the same cost as the one I used to own in San Jose.

WA seems very nice, the no state tax thing basically means a free mortgage payment if you are making good money in tech(not paying CA taxes)

4. aeoleonn ◴[18 Feb 21 22:24 UTC] No.26186600[source]▶
Great point. I suppose it depends on the location-- west of the mountains, in the mountains, or east of the mountains.

With remote work, and an off-grid equipped van, I imagine someone who works from a computer can explore a large swath of the state, and nearby states, to find the right mix of weather and activities.

That said, they'd still likely be based in the Seattle area, and would largely remain subject to its weather conditions.

5. manacit ◴[18 Feb 21 23:33 UTC] No.26187352[source]▶
This is somewhat true, but after picking up skiing, I look forward to the winter weather in Seattle more than I ever did before.

It was a huge game changer for me personally - it took a while to pick up, but now I actually look forward to the months of December to March (sometimes April) in Seattle, because it means I'm 45 minutes away from good skiing, and a couple hours away from great skiing.

Of course, it's not a spot for everyone, but even if you just do cross-country skiing or snowshoeing, it's totally possible to get "great" weather in the winter here.