Hacker News Reader

I'm not sure there ever was such a social contract, since the personal space you're describing is a very modern innovation. As late as the 60s, all offices were open plan offices, and single-room occupancy was simply what you got on the cheaper end of the urban housing market.

View on HN

Sure, you expect to see worse housing "on the cheaper end of the housing market". Compare your grandparent comment:

>>> The risks really seem to come in if you use this model to serve the poor. But as a solution for graduates jumping into their middle-income city gig I think it’s brilliant

Good enough for the middle class, but not good enough for the poor?

Good enough to have available as an option, for people who want to scrimp and save for a bit while they ramp up their careers. Not good enough to push people into one long term.

If it's available as an option and it's cheaper, how are you going to stop the poor from living there?

Farmers spent their days alone in the fields. And the “co-living” model of the early industrial city was soundly rejected, to the point of drastic overreaction - where do you think all these controls on zoning and density came from?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com