Category: 3/18/16

Disclaimer!!!: My notes are always all over the place and unorganized, forgive me for that, but they are meant to serve as reference points or thought provoking points that remind you of topics and ideas mentioned in class. I am sorry if they are hard to follow, but nonetheless, I hope they are helpful.

Building Urban Terrorism into the Course Project…

• “not dealing with an army, dealing with an idea and you can’t kill an idea with an army” (I just really liked what Mohammed said and thought it was too special not to write down)

Topics and Ideas Mentioned to Combat Terrorism…

• Somehow incorporating civic hall
• Mental health/talk centers
• Considering the community ecosystem
• Diversity training –> mom meetings
• Using the app to report domestic abuse and tenant violation as a foundation for an app to create communication between different groups
• Change the law (with regards to media representation)
• Cultural fluency courses to combat ignorance
• Film (made available in app, communities, in classes, etc.)
• Advertising agencies promoting diversity in ads
• Public schools are now closed in Muslim holidays –> starting at a city level change

With Regards to the Class Project…

• Building terrorism, security, and diversity into introduction or make it its own unit?
• Use diversity as an umbrella concept
• In the work unit, tech people speak in terms of functional diversity, not necessarily the cultural diversity we expect
• Underrepresentation of women in the tech economy (might be worth mentioning in the work unit)
• In the housing unit, we can speak in terms of economic and social diversity
• Reminder: Housing team needs to build into their presentation the zoning changes/plan under Mayor de Blaiso’s administration approved by the city council
• Introduction –> Links to Diversity –> Conclusion
• Use neighborhood maps
• Shopping team can select 3 maps an do an ethnic analysis/breakdown of each and focus on these three areas in the interviews
• Build diversity into each of 3 units of this course and of the class project

Quick Recap of Topics Discussed/Should be Mentioned in Class Project

• Umbrella concept of diversity
• Conclusion
• Terrorism
• Housing team must build the new zoning law into their presentation
• Work/economy/tech must use prezi
• Presentation on April 1^st using prezi for the work team

Reflection of Civic Hall

• Civic Hall and 18F?
• Working for the sake of people/society and not just for private companies
• Civic Hall with the advancement of technology –> there will always be new problems that need to be solved and new job opportunities
• Drive, visionaries, “constant symposia of networking”
• Iteration – coming up with an idea, testing it, changing it (testing or experimentation for us)
• Microsoft sells Civic Hall’s ‘products’
• Run a tech academy – trains people for tech jobs/skills
• Corporation still benefits because they are promoting and selling their own products
• Google as well

Talk About the Economy…

• Industry City used to be called Bush Terminal
• Used as warehouses and manufacturing spaces, goods are then shipped out to the city and the rest of the country
• Attracting “gentrifiers” to the food stores on the first floor and then attracting them to the office spaces upstairs
• Industry City will no longer have college dorms
• CUNY and NYU wanted dorm space here
• Local residents don’t want college kids
• Community residents want places that will hire community workers
• Zoning laws
• Tensions between space for housing and work
• Changing the economy from being Wall Street dependent (finance sector) to the tech sector
• Diversity of economic sectors growing at the same time
• Thinking of Civic Tech in this picture of the economy
• Different parts of tech that might want to be mentioned in the class project
• Fashion
• Media
• Civic Hall
• Real Estate (under the umbrella of finance)
• Entertainment (Film and TV production)
• Artisanal food
• ecommerce
• Advertising
• Start-ups in the tech economy using rented offices
• WeWork as an intermediary
• Waterfront (more manufacturing) in Sunset Park
• The entire workforce can change, especially with intentions of building hotels
• Industrial workers will be expected to do different kinds of manufacturing (working with new technology)
• People working in existing manufacturing jobs are likely not to be hired again for jobs as well paid or as well stable (people in their 40s)
• CUNY is active in workforce training (NYC Tech or MOUSE, encouraging the board of education to start computer and coding classes for K-12)
• Financial literacy or cultural literary apps
• Multiplier effect in tech: 1 tech job can create 5 other jobs (reading assignment by Moretti)

The Silicon City exhibit definitely did a wonderful job in displaying the advancements of technology that we have seen involving computer and computer systems. We’ve come a long way from when IBM first created personalized general use computers technologically, and the technological systems get more and more improved each year. One of the things that were noted about the various images featured in the exhibit was the lack of female presence or female acknowledgment. Many of the images featured the team of computer engineers who were almost predominantly men at the time, or if there were women shown they were almost always unidentified. I found this extremely negative but attributed it to the time periods. Then of course, I stumbled upon Grace Hopper’s exhibit and was immediately impressed by her ambition as being one of the first programmers of the Harvard Mark I computers and she taught a new computer language to students called COBOL.

Civic Hall was very different from what i expected. I expected to see a more run down, and basic array of technological innovation. I was quite impressed by the various workers who seemed very enthusiastic and genuinely looking to improve the lives of the masses. The speakers put very much emphasis on the fact that they encouraged people who wanted to get into civic tech, they could do so by “identifying a problem, and working to find a solution”. This is important because it emphasizes that in its purest state, civic tech works to improve the lives of the many, rather than lead to an increase in profits or business. One of the speakers was a woman who created a website to help individuals who were getting any type of federal aid and help them arrange their finances in a matter in which their information and information regarding their situations were laid out for them.

It was mildly intriguing to survey the exhibit at the Historical Society, if only to remind myself of the exponential growth technology has experienced in the past few decades. Far more intriguing however was our foray to Civic Hall, where I immediately felt the energy, altruism, and innovation emanating from the people there. It was clear that this was not a drab, nihilistic office space, but a  hive of ambitious, abstract intellects,  a playground of ideas and a think-tank of real-world progressivism. It was simultaneously refreshing and inspiring to be around so many well educated, skilled, and erudite individuals. Particularly fascinating to me was the inner strength I sensed in their psychological sense of value– these were people directly motivated beyond their egos, sacrificing financial opportunism for the much more savory sensation of practicing the greater moral good. Idealists. However, unlike the little old ladies serving soup in the homeless shelter, these were visionary individuals who had concrete plans for change, and who continuously strive to be architects of human destiny. As a person easily bored by logistics of any sort, it was these radiant qualities which stood out to me amidst the technical rhetoric of their actual projects. Given the opportunity, I would love to examine their psyches: How did they come to view the world the way they do? What are their core values, and do these values have a sound logical basis? What gives them the greatest pleasure in life, and why? How do they derive metaphysical meaning from their mythically heroic activities? Why are they concerned with a human future beyond the (likely) limits of their life span? Do they not, at heart, merely seek to create a world they would want to live in, and is this not inherently selfish? Do they feel that there is a compromise between attempting to master society on the public scale and attempting to master society on the personal scale? Is a lack of one a psychological drive for the other?  etc.

Civic Hall was just inspirational. I am so jealous of the members, their diverse career backgrounds, their skills, the workspace, and most importantly the mission behind Civic Hall. When I think about what I want to do post-college or as a career in the future, I think I am confined to the ordinary expected answers like lawyer, doctor, teacher, etc. I am certain that I want to make the world a better place and I fell that Civic Hall is an unconventional (but will perhaps be conventional in the future) way of making New York City a better place. But what is actually more extraordinary than that is that Civic Hall introduces technologies that make the world a better place. For example, the app that breaks down communication barriers can probably be used by anyone with a phone. One of the speakers also spoke about how soon a technology to help people determine if people are eligible for government assistance and by how much, will soon be available to New Jersey and the goal is to make it available to the U.S., if I understood correctly. The same goes for the technologies they are making to save the government money, as well as other governments. It is just inspirational to think that someone I passed in the city could have indirectly helped parents that do not speak English communicate with their child’s teacher, or help that single mom in New Jersey figure out that she is eligible for food stamps, or help Thailand’s government save money.

Civic Hall was also amazing because of the constant exchange of knowledge. I think Civic Hall can be considered an unorthodox workspace because there is perhaps a web-like exchange of information between a group of collaborators, opposed to a regular office job where knowledge is exchanged one way, usually from boss to employee. I also thought that it is really exciting that someone does not necessarily have to have a background in technology to help work on something that can make someone’s life better. I think that this can contribute to that web-like exchange of knowledge if someone with a mission or idea in mind, who does not have a technology background, can work with someone or even a group, who does know how to code or create new apps, websites, programs, etc. and make something that can help society.

To relate the trip back to the concepts of our class, I definitely think that jobs like or similar to the work done at Civic Hall will become more prominent in New York City’s future. I think that technology is advancing faster than we can imagine, hopefully always with the goal of making the quality of life better, and I think that the members at Civic Hall know this. I think that careers in technology or incorporating technology will drive New York City’s future and Civic Hall seamlessly combines technology with a social cause and produces something that can be used by the average person with a phone. I really hope to one day have a career using a skill I have mastered or enjoy and use it to make the world a better place as eloquently as Civic Hall.

Before the “How we Work” section of this class, we have really only talked about how rezoning affects public housing. Despite the fact that, “The threat of displacement due to rising property values is real not only for industrial businesses but also for the sizable residential population in Sunset Park’s manufacturing zoned area,” I think rezoning affects the economy and job opportunities of an area first, before the residential population. People cannot live or shop in an area where they cannot find work. I have mentioned in previous responses that I think rezoning can be viewed as a temporary fix because it can create job opportunities for the allotted period of time to rezone an area. However, when looking at rezoning long term, it increases the cost of living in that area, it is an effect of gentrification, it displaces large amounts of people, and in terms of the economy or work aspect of this course, rezoning will displace business tenants and their employees which will in fact immediately hurt the economy of the area.

I think the writers of these readings regarding the rezoning plan for Sunset Park described the predicted consequences of this plan so directly, especially when comparing it to what happened to the Latino population that once resided in the Williamsburg – Greenpoint area. The Latino population would be displaced and forced to move further out, which disrupts the cultural and functional diversity of Sunset Park. One of the readings said, “As one of the speakers noted, the last time a New York City waterfront neighborhood faced a similar scaled development proposal was in 2005, when Greenpoint-Williamsburg was rezoned with devastating consequences for the area’s Latino community.” I am fearful that if this rezoning plan is implemented, “the Williamsburg experience of massive displacement and gentrification” will be repeated. Not to mention that this rezoning plan would obviously affect the future, soul, and authenticity of New York City, especially because Sunset Park is one of the only remaining industrial waterfronts in a working class, Latino-Asian area.

In class, we have also talked about the market versus the state. I am mentioning this because the market and the state were two forces I was thinking about in these readings. “Industry City is a commercial real estate venture and its rezoning proposal will make that crystal clear.” I think that the market has is a huge driving force in terms of rezoning plans, especially in this case because the plan proposed for a hotel, university facility, and retail. It was interesting to see the state (more so city government) “combat” this. One of the readings said that, “Mayor de Blasio is considering a ban on hotels as an “as of right” development in light manufacturing zones is a small but positive step towards protecting Sunset Park’s industrial waterfront.” However, in my opinion, this is not enough. Mayor de Blasio should ban the development of hotels. It is not enough to just “consider a ban on hotels.” Such a rezoning plan in Sunset Park would erase the “lives, experiences, and neighborhood spaces of an everyday public, made up of working-class people and communities of color” in order to make room for market forces and a new “public elite,” as the readings put it. If Industry City succeeds in their plan, they could bring gentrification that would displace many middle-class immigrants who live there. However, the market force can justify the consequences because Industry City believes that an upper-middle, or upper class newcomers will benefit the area. It was really interesting to see how a problem we discussed in the housing section of this class affects the economy section differently.

The Silicon City exhibit and our tour of Civic Hall presented a very different outlook on the rise of tech in city than the one we have been presented in our readings.

Though Silicon City felt more like a presentation on the history of tech rather than one focused on tech in New York, it still touched upon the increasing number of tech companies basing themselves in New York as well as the prospects of more tech-focused education, as shown in the building of Cornell Tech. The theme of Silicon City is a future where most people will be employed in some form of tech.

The Civic Hall tour gave a much deeper perspective in effect of tech on the city. Though the presentation was mainly focused on the firm’s effect on the federal government’s tech policies, the underlying theme was that tech is always presenting new opportunities. The firm based in Civic Hall was basically created to address the inefficiencies of government tech. These inefficiencies are partially the result of poorly-run bureaucracy, but it’s also due to the continuous advancement of technology. Tech that was sufficient for certain responsibilities in the past have to be replaced to address the needs of today and the future. The firm works to recognize these inefficiencies and present solutions whenever possible. In a way, the message of Civic Hall is that tech is always changing and there’s always new problems. As a result, that means that there’s always new opportunities.

The Civic Hall tour reaffirmed my beliefs in tech’s true place in the future global economy. Though it is true that, in terms of employees per firm, tech does hire significantly less people than industries like manufacturing, the idea that that will lead to an overall decline in job opportunities is not proven. In my view, with the rise in problems related to tech, the rise in total number of firms may make up for the loss in employees per firm. Throughout tech’s short history, it always seemed that whenever one problem is fixed, ten more rise out of it. It’s like the rise of new programming languages. The language of C++ was created to address the inefficiencies of its predecessor C. While many new opportunities arose because of it, along came new problems that were simply unforeseen in C. Thus, it is unreasonable to believe that we may one day become so efficient in our tech that we may never need to maintain and upgrade it. Tech as we know it will be very different ten, or even five, years from now. There will be new problems and more problems than ever before. Tech has to be there, ever vigilant, to address them.

The rejected zoning changes in Williamsburg, however, brings me back to what I feel is the biggest issue with the rise of tech. It’s not the lack of job opportunities, though that issue is very real in the short term. It’s the prospect of gentrification and the drastic changing of environment that tech brings. Tech’s prosperity is rooted in its tendency to center itself in few locations. That means that it’s almost impossible for tech to prosper in areas without crowding lower-income people out. This issue is not just short-term, it’s long-term. Unless tech suddenly begins offering more lower-skilled positions, perhaps by dividing responsibilities that higher-skilled positions have, tech will always be a profession with a high skill floor and, as a result, a high income. In order to address this issue, we do need to hold off on completely entrenching areas in tech, perhaps only letting a few at a time. We need to make sure that when do let some in that it does not set precedents for other companies to come in at will, which is a primary issue of the proposed zoning changes. In the mean time, we must focus on educating our current and our future workers in tech so that when the time comes when we absolutely need to begin our full shift, that they will be ready to seize the opportunities as they come.

This week’s trip to the “Silicon City” exhibit was really eye-opening for me, seeing the evolution of technology from the first computer that was invented to solve numerical problems, to computers of today’s day and age. Perhaps my favorite part of the exhibit was reading about IBM’s company motto, “THINK”. Without new ideas and thought, there would be no progression, no innovation. There must have been something really inspiring about that motto or perhaps it was the employees constantly seeing the word “think” everywhere because you can really see how their technology evolved over the years. There was a tremendous amount of technological innovation and I saw that as I made my way from the beginning of the exhibit to the end.

Speaking of tremendous technological innovation, it was amazing to hear about the work that Civic Hall is doing. As much of the techno-pessimist that I am, I must say that our visit to Civic Hall has really shed some light on the positive ways technology can be used and how it can people rather than harm them. I was incredibly intrigued by Melanie’s website/app, Benefit Kitchen, which allows users to put information to see what government benefits they are eligible for and even more so, tells them where they can go to get it. It’s extremely unfortunate how much money that was set aside by the government to help families in need goes unclaimed because families or individuals don’t know they are eligible for it or just don’t know where to go to get it. This one app makes the process so much simpler for these families. It’s technology like this that should get more recognition because up until Friday, I had never known about Civic Hall (besides for what we read and spoke about in class) or the Benefit Kitchen app, which leads me to believe that there are so many more people who don’t know about it but can stand to benefit from it or, if not, at least pass on the information to someone else who can. Civic Hall is an amazing company that deserves much more recognition for their work.

The “Silicon City” exhibition and Civic Hall are definitely connected. I learned quite a bit from both about technology’s role in our lives. “Silicon City” showed the evolution of technology and made me really notice how my MacBook Air is almost an entirely different machine than the first computer. The only real similarity is they can both solve math problems. The video games also stood out to me. “Tennis for Two” is simplistic; the only components being a dial to control the movement of a green ball over the line representing the net. The difference between “Tennis for Two”, which came out in 1958 and “Space Invaders” which was released in 1978 is astounding. Not only do the pixels form distinct aliens but the game has components such as levels and extra lives. In the course of twenty years, even technology which is not really needed progressed quickly.

Civic Hall should have its own display in the exhibit. Civic Hall uses current technologies to create new technologies to solve problems and improve the quality of life overall. From what I learned from the presentation and reading the website, Benefit Kitchen seems to be an excellent app. Not only will this improve quality of life for people who should be receiving federal aid but it helps us move towards government transparency. Continuing in this same trend, 18F works with government agencies to create cheaper and better tools and services. Their ‘open sourcing’ means the code is available for everyone to replicate and create their own version specific to their needs.

I like the idea of CivicTech as I stated in my previous posts. However, I think people’s motives are not always so pure. The speakers, minus the woman who created Benefit Kitchen, work for Microsoft. No matter how much freedom you are given, if you work for a paying corporation you have to deliver a product that they will like. This product may not be the most beneficial to our society. The technologies themselves may be beneficial to people but the result of an increased focus on the innovation industry has been disastrous. Many people can no longer afford to live in Silicon Valley due to the incredibly high rent prices caused by the many people wanting to get involved in the industry. This same problem is now occurring in New York with a similar effect.

I wonder if as more apps like Benefit Kitchen are created, more people will answer “yes” when the website asks if you are homeless.

After reading these articles I am less of a techno-pessimist than I was after reading last week’s. However, I still believe that there are many drawbacks to the advancement of technology. The workforce is changing. In Sunset Park the manufacturing district is disappearing and being replaced by stores and apartment buildings. There is a lot of concern about where these unskilled workers will find jobs in this new environment. Some people believe that they have found the solution to this problem through training. CUNY’s College of Technology is teaching computer and entrepreneur classes for prospective employees. According to Murtha’s article, Industry City already employs “some 4,000 low- and middle-skilled workers—about half of them from the surrounding neighborhoods of Sunset Park, Bay Ridge and Red Hook”. Businesses are supposedly making a conscious effort to hire people living in the area, although there is no real enforcement of this.

Job training and educational advancement sound excellent but people are still being displaced from their homes at an alarming rate. As new technology-related business settle in Sunset Park, prices will inevitably rise, people will be out of work, and the neighborhood will change. New residents are attracted to the business prospects, high rises and in this case, a hotel. Strangely enough, people are also attracted to the authentic vibe of the neighborhood that existed before their arrival. People want gritty, but not too gritty; “refined gritty” as Schrager says.

In the readings on Sunset Park (specifically, “Industry City”), we are presented with the classic case of a proletariat struggling to stay afloat amidst a juggernautic wave of progressive, plutocratic development. Despite the cynical and sanctimonious protestations of some (i.e. Tarry Hum), who view new luxury residential and retail developments as a mercenary move contra the livelihood interests of the industrial working class, it is apparent from the third reading that steps are being taken by the Jamestown developers to assuage the damage dealt the local job market, namely by uplifting local residents into career-building positions within the new developments, and by offering them  education opportunities to increase their marketability, a project undertaken in collaboration with NYCCT and various non-profits. According to this source, this project has successful historical precedent in similar Navy Yard developments, and the project in itself has seen promising success thus far in both employing and informing Industry City residents.

This type of modus operandi is exactly what is needed in New York City today. It is useless and unrealistic to resist the change in markets that New York is experiencing in hopes of preserving antiquated livelihoods. Rather, it is the obligation of the agents of change to provide ways to uplift a stagnant and unprepared populace, as is the case here. If this dual system of progress and nurturing prevails in the upcoming development of Brooklyn’s neighborhoods, there will be a smooth and ethically sound transition into the new age of technology and prosperity.

As has been discussed in a prior reflection, there are overwhelming pros and cons of a technologically advanced future, and I maintain my techno-fatalism in lieu of an optimism or pessimism. If forced to choose however, pessimism is always a far wiser attitude, as it allows for a more prepared stance in the face of chaotic possibility. As regards the near future however, as long as well intentioned, constructive programs such as the one above continue to allow for humanistic development at a steady and nurturing pace, I anticipate a growth in happiness and prosperity among New York’s citizenry– it is only right that, in this pivotal age, we have a chance to bask in the twilight of our existence.

The “Innovation Lab” is a 7,700 square-foot facility for teaching classes based on prospective employment positions for the businesses that supported its construction. These labs were looking to be introduced in areas with a high population of immigrants that were lacking in formal education, and with high unemployment rates. The businesses would look to employ skilled workers but a majority of the neighbors were not skilled. These facilities would specifically target these workers, and teach them computer and entrepreneurial skills that would allow them to take up these positions. Offering more training helps locals qualify for higher paying jobs and the number of residents being displaced by more skilled newcomers should decrease.
The CEO of Industry City in Sunset Park, Andrew Kimball, is looking to put in place a one billion dollar redevelopment plan to transform the Sunset Park waterfront into a manufacturing and technology hub by creating thousands of new jobs. He claims that this project will create one of the largest centers for the “innovation economy” and one of New York’s biggest engines of job growth. Industry City’s zoning initially prohibited local development for retailers and hotels, but the new development proposal will have a “special innovation zoning district”, in which will be permitted the development of hotels, universities, conference centers, and retail chains. Developers use this method of having zoning rules bent in order to make for more profitable uses, and seek city aid on top of that. These projects are largely funded by public dollars.
Though they are trying to prevent residents from being displaced, this new economic activity definitely affects the popularity surrounding Industry City. The commercial rents rise in response to the popularity of the neighborhood, and this will lead to harassment on the part of property owners trying to get immigrants out of their rent stabilized apartments. They are attempting to bring Industry City up economically, and trying to prevent displacement and gentrification simultaneously, but it just won’t play along together well.

The planned rezoning and renovation on the waterfront of Sunset Park will be a huge change for the residents and workers who live and work there. This deindustrialization will result in major changes to the big businesses that reside there as well as the small businesses that contribute to the economy of Sunset Park. Although the new project promises to supply many new jobs to compensate, it’s not certain just how many jobs that will be and whether it will be enough to supply jobs to the workers it will displace.

The new projects will have a great impact on the social dimensions and demographics on the waterfront neighborhood. As much as people promote innovation and its benefits, the benefits do not reach everyone and even have negative impacts on some people, such as the workers the innovative projects displace. These people will have to find other jobs and maybe even have to move to different neighborhoods as Sunset Park becomes less affordable to them. The new projects will attract more middle and upper class people to the area, thereby causing rents to rise and relocation of people of lower income, thus promoting gentrification. The only people benefiting from these innovation projects are the owners of these new buildings, the higher-income individuals, and perhaps the people who manage to secure jobs working there.

These articles from this week’s readings have not changed my stance on being a techno-pessimist, however, it has opened eyes to many new issues that I hadn’t thought of that come along with innovation.

The readings definitely made me more bearish on the prospects of a tech-dominated New York. I am still skeptical that tech will reduce job opportunities in long run, but I am worried about how the influx of tech is causing a new wave of gentrification and tech’s short-term threat to job opportunities.

The Industry City proposal is seen by some as the future Brooklyn manufacturing sector. Supposedly, the plan will create 20,000 jobs. However, this is also coming at the heels of gentrification in rising property values and living costs. As Hum points out, rising property values in Sunset Park’s manufacturing area may displace both businesses and residents. Considering the nature of tech, it is reasonable to wonder just how many jobs will be created by Industry City. I am also disheartened by the focus that Industry City is putting on innocuous parts of the plan like hotels and bicycle paths; do these parts of the plan also threaten the residents?

Nonetheless, I still firmly believe that in the long run, if we push for standardized computer education, we can see a future where tech does drive job growth. This is shown in the third article where a new business is going out of its way to seek local talent and train them themselves in the Innovation Lab. As important as manufacturing is to the area, the industry’s decline has more to do with the rise of cheap labor in other countries than the rise of tech. I believe that even if this proposal hadn’t been made, the city’s manufacturing sector would’ve eventually died off. We should definitely push our city to adapt to the changing economy rather than slow it down for the sake of keeping some jobs in the short term. However, in the short term with so many tech companies coming in at once, there definitely will be a dip in employment and even residency among older New Yorkers.

This part is a continuation of my previous response. You asked about the $10,000 bootcamps. The $10,000 coding bootcamps are on the extreme end and are inherently designed to make regular people into “fully-qualified” programmers in about 19 weeks of intense training. In theory, investment should be recouped almost immediately after completing the bootcamp by landing a job since demand for programmers is high right now. However, the effectiveness of the bootcamp is questionable and typically not advised for newcomers. Instead what older New Yorkers should do is look to the numerous free web academies and videos online that teach people how to code. The second and third article discusses the Innovation Lab, a public and privately-funded vocational school that provides job training for residents looking for work in the Industry City. Nonetheless, even with all these resources, the older labor force may still not be able to adapt. Thus, it is uncertain what will happen in the short term especially to those living in the proposed Tech Triangle. However, like I said before, I remain bullish on the prospects of New York’s future economy.