-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Rich Brits in luxury condos w/floor-to-ceiling windows not happy that normal people can see in. Don't want to install blinds.
- Thread starter Syriel
- Start date
Privacy glass reduces brightness by around 40%. They couldn't possibly compromise their 7-figure apartments like that!
I would get the complaints if the museum viewing platform was a recent development, but that doesn't appear to be the case.
If I were buying a condo it's something I would like to know ahead of time, might have been a scummy move to not notify the buyers.
Regardless, blinds solve this particular issue, but they also ruin the reason for buying such a condo in the first place.
If I were buying a condo it's something I would like to know ahead of time, might have been a scummy move to not notify the buyers.
Regardless, blinds solve this particular issue, but they also ruin the reason for buying such a condo in the first place.
Ah, I've never noticed the reduction tbh. But yeah, if they have the option of that or blinds and still refuse my sympathy for them is very limited.
*avatar quote*
Presumably while listening to Huey Lewis and the News.
This is my thought too. Does seem to be a high degree of hate in this thread due to them having money though, which is a bit weird. I'm sure having a viewing platform built across the road from you isn't something most people would want, regardless of how much money they have.
I rather have a nice view than privacy. People in these buildings have seen me naked pretty sure:
Your avatar is fitting
I'm not aware of anything else like this in other big cities actually - yes it's common for a building to look across at another building, but it's less common for a very popular museum and tourist attraction (let alone in a major world capital) to put up a viewing platform which is situated right next to a block of flats. Yes, the people should have known that it was getting built when they bought their flats, but you can't argue that the result is exactly the same as if you can look into your neighbours' windows from your flat. This is specifically designed for thousands of tourists a day to come and look out from, and there's nothing on that side of the building worth looking at other than directly into those people's flats.
I don't get this at all. Is there a meaning of peloton I'm not aware of?
More specifically:
Everyone rides their Peloton in front of floor to ceiling windows for.. reasons...
It's not weird to not care about or even hate rich people. What made you think that it was. They have solutions to their problem, but they'd rather bother other people instead.
It is weird to hate anyone based on their financial status. Very weird.
I have to admit that "spying" those apartments was probably the most fun I've had at Tate (seriously, the fixed exhibit is not good). I have this great shot of a tourist standing by a sign on the wall saying "please respect our neighbors' privacy" with a pair of binoculars on his hands and staring for minutes at the windows.
That's such a strange request, lol. If you're happy hating then you go right ahead and carry on I guess. It's not a normal reaction though. Maybe ask yourself why you'd hate someone just in the basis of their being rich?
So you can't say why you defend people who can easily solve their own problems but chose not to? I don't think its weird to be condescending and dismissive towards people who could put up some blinds but instead would rather pursue a legal challenge through to the high court against a public institution.
OP
OP
I'll be honest, I didn't even think about that. Was just the assumption that it's Brits because it's in London. Kind of like I'd default to Americans for SF or NYC.
The big "open" rooms with full windows on two sides weren't sold as "rooms" but were meant as "indoor patios" given London's seasonal weather patterns. It's just that buyers opted to use them as living rooms.
This happened at my apartment building in SF.
"The club across the street is TOO NOISY! The parking lot next door fills up at night!"
"Um, both were there well before this apartment building was built."
Approval for the platform and approval to build the condos was granted at about the same time.
This is not a case of people buying condos, and then the museum suddenly installing a platform. Buyers would have known about the platform. They either ignored it, or didn't think it would be popular, when they decided to buy. And the Tate has made efforts to be a good neighbor (limiting viewing hours), but the Tate serves the public.
At a certain point it's like "you knew about this when you bought your condo, stop complaining about it now." That's pretty much the angle the Judge took. He even said that they could install privacy film (among other options) on their condo windows to solve the issue.
I rather have a nice view than privacy. People in these buildings have seen me naked pretty sure:
Your place is always so clean in photos, it looks like a model unit. This is max level minimalism that would make Marie Kondo proud.
Are we sure that tabris is actually a real person? ;)
I don't have much sympathy, but I went up there a couple of weeks after the Tate extension opened, and yeah you can see right in people's living rooms.
So privacy was not a consideration when purchasing the apartments? Too fucking bad, then.
Fuck, privacy has always been a major consideration of mine when renting and buying property.
Fuck, privacy has always been a major consideration of mine when renting and buying property.
Forget high-rises, I'm amazed at the number of people moving into these new three- to five-story apartments in Brooklyn that just don't get the concept of blinds.
No, it's actually on the buyers/renters to do their due diligence before closing on a property. My apartment has floor to ceiling windows with a good view of Manhattan, but me and my girlfriend literally researched the DOB database to see if there would be any future construction that could potentially block it before we signed the lease.
Last edited:
I didn't defend them though...
I just find it strange to just dismiss people because they happen to be rich. Post number 5 sums it up.
Why not? They have simple solutions to their problems that most regular people could manage easily.
It's a shame that the residents find themselves in this situation, but at least they can solve it quite easily themselves.
Fucking rich people. Fuck them.
I'll always opt for the first choice.
This forum is dripping with resentment for "the rich". Paradoxically nobody can seem to agree on what rich actually means either.
But yeah, the idea seems to be that people with money are at an immediate moral disadvantage, and as long as you punch up you are on the right side of the situation, logic be damned.
Here's the view from the Tate gallery:
While this is a really petty thing to complain about (especially demanding Tate to rectify a problem they didn't even cause), whoever designed those apartment buildings probably should have paid more attention to the area since I'm pretty sure these apartments were built around the time the Tate Modern was drawing up plans for the extension. Actually, I really don't understand why you would build apartments with such revealing windows anyway, especially in an area with a number of active developments under construction.
Those areas are not even meant to be living space, they were meant to be "winter gardens". The actual living areas of those flats isn't visible.
LOL! Dismissing people because they are rich. We are dismissing people because they chose not to buy a blind. FUCK ALL OF THEM. Wasting our courts time and resources when they could have solve it themselves, but hey, let's try and close a whole public gallery, because we don't want poor people looking in our floor to ceiling windows.
Fucking rich people...
Poor people looking in? Shit gets more like a Dickens novel.
Last edited:
Dude, did you lose the lawsuit? Buy a fucking blind. It's like £5 at argos.co.uk
If someone is able to afford an expensive home, good for them. But these people are throwing their money around hoping to close a free, public installation at a renowned gallery that had planning permission before they bought their homes.
Shit like this is exactly why people hate the rich - using their money to bully something they want after the fact. They probably knew they would lose the case, but had no problem wasting the court's time (taxpayer funded), the council's time (taxpayer funded) and the Tate's time (taxpayer/patron funded).
If they have so much money they could have floor to ceiling electric inked windows. Perfectly clear, give your order / flip a switch and they're tinted.
I love floor to ceiling windows. But I have no shame and I'd be naked around the house anyway.
You have a beautiful place.
I love floor to ceiling windows. But I have no shame and I'd be naked around the house anyway.
I rather have a nice view than privacy. People in these buildings have seen me naked pretty sure:
You have a beautiful place.
Lmao, this too.
All lovey dovey looking, but then reality differs.
Well it's their winter gardens, i.e. the equivalent of a balcony. So anyone could report them to the police for broadcasting porn in public.
I rather have a nice view than privacy. People in these buildings have seen me naked pretty sure:
I've seen those flats when I went to the take modern. They are definitely gold fish bowls and you can see into them.
Maybe some rich people like showing off. Maybe others like privacy.
But it was pretty obvious you won't get privacy. I'm better loads brought them without seeing them first
Maybe some rich people like showing off. Maybe others like privacy.
But it was pretty obvious you won't get privacy. I'm better loads brought them without seeing them first