I'm assuming he means the Pike/Pine alley and Pioneer square, sadly famous for aggressive panhandling, unruly 'youth', and shootings. I live in and work in downtown (haven't driven in months) and it's def. getting a little more 'rough' by the month. Especially Westlake area.
Most of those complaints are from people who haven't lived in Seattle long enough to know those areas have been problem spots for at least 20 years. My father worked downtown in the early/mid-80s and says it was exactly the same then, if not a little bit worse. Not that that excuses the problem. Also, the Seattle PD is absolutely petrified of doing anything that might incur the wrath of the Department of Justice. Blaming McGinn for the street people is like blaming him for I-5 traffic: it's been a problem before, and it will continue to be a problem until something very drastic happens (and in the case of street people, it will take something unpalatable to Seattle's NIMBY/sensitive electorate)
Crime is down nationally since the 80s. So for things to be the same, or only a little better says a lot.
I completely agree that SPD is petrified. I've live/worked in downtown Seattle for a while - and while I think some of the 'scaryness' is overblown, it's hard not to see a change in the trend over the past few years.
I don't know that I'd call it "petrified" -- I believe the common term is "de-policing." It's a passive-aggressive way for SPD to deal with leadership that they don't respect.
SPD has an incredibly strong union, which is where the real problem lies IMHO. A bad cop almost literally has to murder somebody before they can fire him. DOJ took note of the resulting abuses, but of course they aren't interested in going toe-to-toe with the union, and neither is the mayor.
It's a complex problem but it stems from a fairly ordinary failure of leadership, and that particular buck stops in the mayor's office.
I apologize, this is an assumption I'm making. I guess I meant the youth that hang out all over Westlake, especially later at night, resemble the homeless youth around Portland.
Considering a lot of them are there during school hours and you'll see the same ones there sleeping with tarps at night - I think its safe to say homeless. Probably better to say 'young adults' though - Seattle YouthCare (http://www.youthcare.org/) does a great job with the younger groups.
I used to work at the intersection of 2nd and Pine, where a stabbing took place right outside of work. Most of the violence in the area being gang-related isn't exactly the best reassurance of your safety.
> "If you want to find a scapegoat for panhandling, I'd first turn to the recession..."
How many of those homeless people are on the streets because they lost their factory jobs and the bank kicked them out of their McMansion? I am guessing very few.
The recession didn't make these people heroin addicts or mentally ill. The homeless people that make people concerned about walking around downtown Seattle during the evening aren't the "couchsurfing until I can find a new job" kind of homeless people.
Pointing at the state of healthcare, mental or otherwise, hits the nail on the head. That is a problem larger than Seattle though.
Not looking for a scapegoat, only a solution. And I lived here before the recession/GFC. I'd completely agree that the "social/medical/mental safety net in this country" is a major problem.
Comcast has other serious challengers here in Seattle as well between CascadeLink (terrible website, but top notch service) and CondoInternet, if you can get either of those, you'll never look at Comcast again (between $30-60/month for 30/100mbit)
Those are hardly challengers; they service upscale condos and select buildings only. I live in the damn city and I can't get CenturyLink/Quest 40mbps (12mbps max), CascadeLink, CondoInternet, or the future Seattle Gigabit. Ridiculous.
Comcast services only select locations too. A good number of apartments around the city don't even offer Comcast (and instead the aforementioned and other services such as 'Wave'). The building I live in (granted, yes, an upscale condo), had several offerings.
Full on competition? No. But better than a wide majority of cities? Yes. (Try living in Florida...ugh)
What you're talking is yield and volatility. When you're running a fund, you need to manage to benchmarks, and MSFT is a great position for exposure. IV is on the low end, there is plenty of liquidity should you need to raise cash, and with a dividend of right around 3% you have a nice predictable return, which is a big deal with institutional investing.
Additionally securities like MSFT, you can comfortably get 'aggressive' through call writing, and juice returns a little more without your risk metrics being outside your targets.
You just took T'so's quote totally out of context in order to make a fatuous point. In reality, Torvalds and T'so have a better understanding of software security topics than virtually anyone who comments on HN.
For anyone wondering, he literally does not say that.
He says if you're in the government they're one of the good guys, if you're anyone else you want to mix the results of their RNG with some other source.
For credit repair, you'll need to do certified mail for certain requests. This is something we're getting ready to launch :-) Feel free to reach out (info in profile), if we can help.
