prev <-> next
[2022-08-29 18:09:43] - yep! ~a
[2022-08-29 18:08:05] - a: good for sc2 tonight? -Daniel
[2022-08-27 00:11:02] - a: My area could BECOME amazing. It won't. But it it's not because there isn't potential. -- Xpovos
[2022-08-26 23:39:56] - xpovos: on the other hand, you're surrounded by the best mountain biking in our area. locust shade park, quantico, fountainhead regional park, laurel hill, meadowood recreation area, bull run occoquan trail, these are such great places to bring a mountain bike. pwfp (prince william forest park) is great for road biking. ~a
[2022-08-26 23:33:57] - xpovos: i've biked along minieville road near dale city. it's so terrible, i won't do that again. the sidewalk there is too tiny for bikes and minieville roadway is terrible for all forms of transportation cars especially. i suffered on the sidewalk when i saw how crazy the drivers were in the roadway. ~a
[2022-08-26 23:27:57] - a: You could walk to a grocery store (your choice, even) but either requires crossing a 4/6 lane road, some of the busiest in the area--major thoroughfares. You might decide to bike places, but there are no bike lanes and very few trails. And the drivers are aggressive. Way back when my father biked these roads he nearly got killed. Also, if you're walking expect to be accosted by panhandlers. -- Xpovos
[2022-08-26 23:23:51] - a: Welcome to hell: renting a studio apartment near me. (https://www.daleforestapts.com/floorplans) Nearly $1400/month for not even 500 sqft. It's 3 miles to the highway. There is no metro, of course, if there were it would be ~3-++ miles away. It is 6 miles to light rail. There is bus "service." -- Xpovos
[2022-08-26 19:51:37] - xpovos: i agree. high density (or mixed, or medium honestly) next to non-transit sounds terrible. ~a
[2022-08-26 19:51:17] - a: "yeah, and i see it as the best of both worlds" Maybe for the SFH people. I guess I wonder what the duplex people get from being near the SFHs.... Higher property values? -Paul
[2022-08-26 19:50:49] - IMO, the real cardinal sin is these high(er) density zones, apartment buildings and to a much lower extent townhomes, in non-walkable/non transited area. Now you're just putting excess strain on the non-mass transit options. Duplexes do that too, but to a much lesser extent. If I could trade townhomes for duplexes in my area I would take that in a heartbeat. -- Xpovos
[2022-08-26 19:49:08] - Duplexes mostly affect affordability, not walkability. -- Xpovos
[2022-08-26 19:47:45] - Daniel: my lawn uses literally zero water. -- Xpovos
[2022-08-26 19:40:55] - paul: yeah, and i see it as the best of both worlds.
like things are more walkable for the sfh folks and ... i dunno, i'm not sure it affects the duplex people as much. ~a[2022-08-26 19:39:01] - a: It honestly kind of feels like the worst of both worlds? Like, things aren't as walkable for the high-density folks and.... I dunno.... I'm not sure it affects the single family home people as much. -Paul
[2022-08-26 18:55:57] - paul: i think you live in medium density. mixed-density is like when you have duplexes and sfh in the same area. it's common where i live. and parts of annandale and alexandria. and, like, europe and whatnot. ~a
[2022-08-26 18:54:30] - i was thinking a duplex. ~a
[2022-08-26 18:53:32] - a: "two families on the same plot" like a townhouse? Or an apartment? I don't know if I care if there are apartments or townhouses nearby. -Paul
[2022-08-26 18:52:40] - a: I don't really know what mixed density means. To me, it kind of means the suburbs where I live. We're not urban. We're not rural. I have access to nearly all the amenities that I want/need within reasonable radius, but yeah, I guess for most of those I need to drive. -Paul
[2022-08-26 18:45:55] - paul/daniel: what are your thoughts on mixed-density? whenever communities talk about mixed-density everybody's nimby alarms go off, so if we could instead, look at a mixed-use neighborhood in a vacuum and ignore how it got there: do you like the idea of multi-family (2-plex) homes and sfh on the same street? paul, if you have your huge all-grass lawn, but down the street somebody instead has two families on the same plot, is that ok? ~a
[2022-08-26 18:42:27] - daniel: being in the outdoors is good for the soul, i don't think it's oregon trail alone! in nova, if you want hiking, or camping, or the great outdoors, you will probably be looking for (at best) mixed-density. lots of that mixed-density is along the c&o canal though, so i still often use a non-car. i'm going to just start calling it my non-car. ~a
[2022-08-26 18:42:15] - a: I think you can make a strong argument against lawns. They use a lot of water, and sometimes fertilizer. Lots of gas for cutting it routinely.... -Paul
[2022-08-26 18:36:28] - a: Same idea though I think yeah more people in mixed / high density area's would lead to less cars but wondering what could lead to more people choosing that other than just $ factors. -Daniel
[2022-08-26 18:35:18] - Like does learning about the Oregon Trail and the wild west and shit like that when we are super young ingrain in our minds as a general populace a desire for open space and thus single family housing? Do single family homes by nature of being more expensive than apartments / condos / etc have more aspirational and thus fall more into the dream category? Ranomd thoughts. -Daniel
[2022-08-26 18:32:54] - daniel: i don't want to promote bikes. i just want to get people out of cars. (not even exclusively, just like out of cars . . . some. like, for context, i own two cars) i agree higher density would help get people out of cars. ~a
[2022-08-26 18:32:15] - a: I don't super care about lawns specifically either (though they do use a shit ton of water) but in general just wondering about the root causes for why we don't have more high density / mixed use areas and what could be done on those fronts to ultimately lead to more bikes. -Daniel
[2022-08-26 18:31:24] - i think maybe grass is bad though? i really don't know, sorry. ~a
[2022-08-26 18:31:08] - paul/daniel: ok. i don't actually care about lawns, i was kidding. ~a
[2022-08-26 18:30:17] - .. a pro bike position than before. -Daniel
[2022-08-26 18:30:09] - a: I get that lawns might not be a desire for you but I do think they are a desire for a significant portion of the population and that lawns and people's desire for single family housing and the root of those wants might be better served as pressure points rather than skipping ahead to bikes. Like if you could convince Paul to not care about his lawn or desire to not have other families within 30 feet it seems like he would be closer to..
[2022-08-26 18:27:15] - I am not super attached to my lawn, but I do love my yard in the sense of providing an open space for my kids to play (and for me to play with them). I'm sorry, I don't want people living 30 feet on all sides of me (and above me). It's nice sitting in our screened-in porch and imagining it's just us and the deer. Or having a play-set set up. Yards are nice and useful. -Paul
[2022-08-26 17:53:33] - don't get me started on lawns.
~a[2022-08-26 17:52:45] - "everybody DOES want to live in a walkable neighborhood" - I think I would challenge this some too. I think there are people that do choose high density but I think the stereotypical "American Dream" is still the single family house with a yard and that as more people get that it inevitably becomes lower density. -Daniel
[2022-08-26 17:45:31] - a: "it's not impossible" I kind of think it is. There are finite limits even with high density. Are there water parks and campgrounds in high density areas? Can the elementary and middle and high schools all be within walking distance? What if I want my kids to go to a magnet school or private school? -Paul
[2022-08-26 17:45:20] - paul: i accept it. i feel bad for the people that don't have a choice, but i accept that you can have your weird desires. on the other hand it's the conservative commentator that thinks you're living in a socialist paradise. it's the libertarians that hate having big government with huge taxes and subsidies for private users. ~a
[2022-08-26 17:43:18] - a: "oh man that would be so sweet, i'd move there in a heartbeat." Right, and I would still hate it. I accept your (weird) desires for where you want to live. Why can't you accept my (normal) one?
-Paul[2022-08-26 17:42:11] - a: You see a car as some demon device which ruins everything. I see it as liberation that allows me access to ramen and pho and ethiopian food and 6 different types of grocery stores and dozens of camps for my kids. -Paul
[2022-08-26 17:42:06] - paul: "it's impossible to have all the places I want to go be so close to me" it's not impossible. but it does violate your other constraint. ~a
[2022-08-26 17:41:29] - a: "walkable neighborhood" is a very vague term. I can walk around my neighborhood, but I doubt anybody would describe my neighborhood as walkable. Would I love to be able to walk to literally every place I want to go? Sure. But I also love having a variety to choose from and it's impossible to have all the places I want to go be so close to me so I am happy with the trade-off of having to drive. -Paul
[2022-08-26 17:41:05] - paul: "if people want to come at me and my situation and lecture me about how much better biking would be I'm sorry, I don't accept that" it was the conservative commentator that thinks you're living in a socialist paradise. at least admit having the big bad government subsidize the fuck out of your commute makes you feel just a bit dirty. ~a
[2022-08-26 17:40:42] - paul: "I frankly don't care if NYC wants to replace all their roads with bike lanes" oh man that would be so sweet, i'd move there in a heartbeat. ~a
[2022-08-26 17:38:07] - paul: "not everybody wants to live in high density areas" i'd word it differently. everybody DOES want to live in a walkable neighborhood. and by everybody, i don't mean literally. but like 90% of the world wants to live in a walk-able neighborhood. yet we almost NEVER build them. why is that? because . . . fucking . . . cars. ~a
[2022-08-26 17:36:03] - Also, re: the PPP loans. Even if I were to accept the hypocrisy there, I still don't get the point. So forgiving loans IS bad? PPP was a bad program? Yes and yes. -Paul
[2022-08-26 17:35:52] - daniel: a bit of a quibble, but i usually try to say "fuck bikes" and focus on people on foot, and public transportation, and scooters. but, this time i quoted a conservative commentator that was focusing on bikes, so i guess, my bad. ~a
[2022-08-26 17:34:46] - a: And not everybody wants to live in high density areas. I hate cities. Would hate to live in one. Those pictures of fast food restaurants and parking lots that you think look dystopian? I think pictures of NYC and DC with dirty alley ways and homeless people around every corner look dystopian. -Paul
[2022-08-26 17:34:32] - daniel: "zoning and multi use district advocates as an extreme example would that end up netting more bikers in the end?", eh it depends. you can have shitty unusable car-friendly high-density areas too. it's a shame, but they exist. ~a
[2022-08-26 17:33:35] - a: "but i do understand, paul, i do" Right, and I understand why some people in high density areas might prefer walking and biking and subways to cars. I frankly don't care if NYC wants to replace all their roads with bike lanes. Enjoy! But if people want to come at me and my situation and lecture me about how much better biking would be I'm sorry, I don't accept that. -Paul
[2022-08-26 17:32:51] - daniel: "which I think you do - but maybe less than biking" yes. both. "w/o high density living going straight to advocating for bikes seems like a tough sell?" yes, true. ~a
[2022-08-26 17:31:19] - a: "yes, i think it's a good analogy" Yeesh. I don't get it. The PPP thing was to try to "fix" a "problem" created by the government itself in terms of lockdowns and the idea was always that it was basically a handout. Nobody made people take out huge student loans. I don't know if anybody until pretty recently took seriously the idea that student loans could be free money that you wouldn't have to pay back. -Paul
[2022-08-26 17:31:05] - a: Life if all biking advocacy groups just dropped "bikes" from their platform and became zoning and multi use district advocates as an extreme example would that end up netting more bikers in the end? -Daniel
[2022-08-26 17:30:16] - a: I'm not 100% but as an idea would it make more sense to advocate for higher desnity living spaces (which I think you do - but maybe less than biking) more than biking since I think more biking would follow from more high density living but w/o high density living going straight to advocating for bikes seems like a tough sell? -Daniel
[2022-08-26 17:24:47] - paul: i believe and agree that driving a car out near reston/herndon is often your only real choice (if time is your metric). and that makes me pretty sad for the people that don't have a choice. but i do understand, paul, i do. ~a
[2022-08-26 17:22:45] - paul: or you can do it 20 minutes on foot, or 15 minutes on the metro, or 10 minutes on a scooter, or 5 minutes on the bike. thousands of people do it every day. ~a
[2022-08-26 17:22:40] - paul: "I know you specified 'high density situations'". yes i did. i specified "high density situations" so think "not in paul's every-day wheelhouse". have you tried to get from a parking space at the washington convention center to a parking space on constitution on a weekday? it'll take you like 2-3 hours to get to you car, drive to constitution, and find a parking space on constitution ave (most of that will be finding parking). ~a
[2022-08-26 17:13:14] - paul: yes, i think it's a good analogy. ~a
[2022-08-26 17:12:07] - paul: technically, no. the gi bill is very much not called "forgiveness". nothing in the wikipedia article or bill text say anything about forgiveness. ~a
[2022-08-26 17:09:51] - a: It's like the military loan forgiveness thing. Technically they are both called "forgiveness", but the circumstances seem incredibly different to the point of having nearly nothing in common. -Paul
[2022-08-26 17:09:13] - a: And it seems like a mountain of difference between: "We are making you close your business down for months but will give you a loan that we will probably forgive to encourage you to keep paying your employees" and "I'm going to take out a loan for to pay for my overpriced degree and hope it gets forgiven later on as an election ploy" -Paul
[2022-08-26 17:07:43] - a: Are you referring to the PPP loan thing? Do you think those are good analogies? Because I think it's a crappy one. As I understand it, the plan was for many PPP loans to be forgiven even from the start (https://www.vox.com/21529071/ppp-loan-forgiveness-lenders-sba-delay-paycheck-protection-program). -Paul
[2022-08-26 17:06:25] - does it cross over for me. -Paul
[2022-08-26 17:06:19] - a: "optimizing for time would actually get you out of your car and onto a subway system, or on foot, or on a bus, or on a scooter, etc" I know you specified "high density situations", but it's worth noting that for me, it's extremely rare where a car ISN'T the most efficient method of transportation. Often the metro takes just as long if not longer. Only when we reach things like trips of hundreds of miles where planes are better... -Paul
[2022-08-26 16:47:09] - sorry, i'm sure you all saw this yesterday, but if not it's relevant to our loan forgiveness discussion: the whitehouse twitter pointed out dozens of congresspeople who had loans forgiven but were against loan forgiveness (yes, i also don't like the loan forgiveness, but i also didn't have any loans forgiven. the hypocrisy kills me) ~a
[2022-08-26 14:01:47] - a: I'm with you at that point, for the most part. I hate driving in cities. If I lived in a city (really, not just for census purposes) I'd feel very differently about my car, and possibly cars in general. -- Xpovos
[2022-08-26 13:30:45] - xpovos: wow ok til. i guess, looking at the definitions now, I'd strike my last sentence. the rest stands on it's own though. ~a
[2022-08-26 11:48:35] - a: Yes. The numbers are messy because definitions are bad. But the estimate is 56% of the world population lives in cities. For North America it's much much higher even. But... as I said, it's because definitions are bad: https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/geography/guidance/geo-areas/urban-rural/2010-urban-rural.html -- Xpovos
[2022-08-25 19:36:06] - xpovos: i always try to specify that non-cars work in a high density world, but have trouble with low density worlds. sometimes i forget to mention that. most people live in cities. ~a
[2022-08-25 19:34:24] - xpovos: in a high density situation though, optimizing for time would actually get you out of your car and onto a subway system, or on foot, or on a bus, or on a scooter, etc. ~a
[2022-08-25 19:31:01] - a: My car is a much more efficient tool at getting me to my job than a bike, certainly. It *WOULD* be more efficient than other options too, if it were permitted, even with the drawbacks. It's just about what your measuring for efficiency. In this case, time. -- Xpovos
[2022-08-25 19:29:53] - a: Yes. That was intentional.
-Paul[2022-08-25 19:27:12] - paul: in your analogies you seem to have picked things that require more infrastructure but are MORE efficient at getting the job done. ~a
[2022-08-25 19:26:48] - nice. ~a
[2022-08-25 19:26:38] - a: You've got me beat. I haven't ridden my Ioniq 5 on any wooden ramps.... -Paul
[2022-08-25 19:25:44] - I mean, yes, cars require more infrastructure. Just like a dryer requires more infrastructure than a clothes line. Or indoor plumbing requires more infrastructure than an outhouse. Central air requires more infrastructure than a fan. -Paul
[2022-08-25 19:25:24] - paul: sorry, it was an attempt at levity. those jumps are obviously waaay out of my comfort zone. but, nah, i have literally ridden my bike on a motorsports track before. it was this spring! ~a
[2022-08-25 19:22:43] - a: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nN4SSsAnJaw Sure? Ride your bike here? I don't get your point. That's not a road for cars OR bikes. It's a park designed for bikes to do tricks. -Paul
[2022-08-25 16:59:12] - paul: take your hyundai ioniq ev on this road ~a
[2022-08-25 16:52:37] - paul: it's why the (authoritarian . . . or communist) sfh zoning laws are so insidious. ~a
[2022-08-25 16:51:32] - paul: "biking can't replace a fraction of the utility cars can" you aren't the only one with this perspective. in low-density areas, i agree with you. in high density areas, i think cars can't replace a fraction of the utility that bikes can (or people on foot can, or buses can, or a subway system can, or any subset of the above). ~a
[2022-08-25 16:48:29] - paul: yes, you're right, if i don't see a tree root coming, i can get caught off guard by it and that's bad. but, generally bikes can go over much bigger roots and stumps and all kinds of rocks and shit that cars absolutely cannot. ~a
[2022-08-25 16:35:51] - a: https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4sao5o Yup. Always. Not even close. -Paul
[2022-08-25 16:34:52] - a: But, again, this is such a stupid false equivalency. Bike people love to make these sweeping statements like, "biking is infinitesimally less likely to kill you" but biking can't replace a fraction of the utility cars can. It's like saying nobody should be living in these super expensive and bad for the environment houses when a tent is a thousand times cheaper. -Paul
[2022-08-25 16:33:42] - No not at all. The car hates tree roots more. Like always. It isn't even close. ~a
[2022-08-25 16:32:08] - a: "i've been on a lot of unpaved paths and the maintenance that is required on those unpaved paths because of cars is insane" That wasn't my point. My point is that if you have a dirt path with random tree roots popping up or rocks jutting out or the occasional dip.... I would be terrified to bike on that at almost any speed whereas I think plenty of cars could handle that at a slow speed. Ditto for gravel paths. -Paul
[2022-08-25 16:23:51] - paul: ("I haven't seen ANYBODY talking about leaving dirt paths around for biking" a bit of an aside, but i'm in the leadership of an advocacy group where that is our only mission. it's called "arlington trails" and we're on facebook). ~a
[2022-08-25 16:22:40] - paul: "cars work on non-paved ground too... I would argue they might even work better than bikes" nooo. definitely not. cars work much worse on non-paved ground than bikes. i've been on a lot of unpaved paths and the maintenance that is required on those unpaved paths because of cars is insane. ~a
[2022-08-25 16:22:28] - paul: "Are you saying you don't need a paved path for biking and walking?" yes but i'm also saying that it's much much much (orders of magnitude) cheaper to pave paths for bikes and pedestrians than roads for cars. @tomhfh is right and you have such a dumb quibble about it. ~a
[2022-08-25 16:18:11] - a: "bikes (and people on foot) also work on the ground" I'm not sure I understand your point? Are you saying you don't need a paved path for biking and walking? If so, then sure, but I haven't seen ANYBODY talking about leaving dirt paths around for biking. Also, cars work on non-paved ground too... I would argue they might even work better than bikes. -Paul
[2022-08-25 16:04:42] - Can't stop the signal, Mal.
[2022-08-25 15:39:31] - mig: regardless it seems dumb to try to remove videos from the internet. it never works and people will start to pass around the videos even more. ~a
[2022-08-25 15:37:15] - mig: i agree. like you said, their mission statement is unattainable. ~a
[2022-08-25 15:28:10] - paul: aaalso, if it matters multi-use-paths are *orders* of magnitude less expensive. more than one order of magnitude. ~a
[2022-08-25 15:27:58] - "We want to push for safer and more resilient software" is admirable. Making impossible demands is nutty. - mig
[2022-08-25 15:26:37] - a: probably. There's a pretty high bar for defamation with a company like Tesla. I'm not sure I put much stock in the outfit behind this video. "We Demand Software that Never Fails and Can’t Be Hacked." There's ideals, and then there's outright lunacy. - mig
[2022-08-25 15:25:41] - paul: "somebody is building those sidewalks and bike lanes too" no ho ho! nice try, but bikes (and people on foot) also work on the ground! as long as you don't have any communist-paths in the way, bikes/peds will just work. ~a
[2022-08-25 15:23:51] - of transportation than you think. -Paul
[2022-08-25 15:23:45] - a: The point about government paying for roads is well taken, but I don't think that's an inherent thing to cars (and somebody is building those sidewalks and bike lanes too). I object to the idea that in a free market everybody would be smiling and biking in wide open lanes. I actually think in a free market we would probably have more and bigger roads, but we've already established that I think cars are a better and preferred form... -Paul
[2022-08-25 15:07:15] - also, the streisand effect ~a
[2022-08-25 14:55:29] - along the lines of california and electric cars: no idea who this guy is, but reddit seems to think he's a conservative commentator. i like it, maybe we can be best friends. ~a
[2022-08-25 14:46:05] - paul: i'll take false equivalence for $1000, Mayim. - mig
[2022-08-25 14:01:47] - Xpovos: At least California has plenty of energy and a robust power grid to support all those incoming EVs.
-Paul[2022-08-25 13:55:21] - The most interesting take that I assume was supportive of the action that I saw was this one: https://twitter.com/RyanJMarotta/status/1562522165656027136 I'll admit, though, that I always had a bit of a problem with the story of the prodigal son.
-Paul[2022-08-25 13:54:29] - xpovos: yeah, as i'm sure i've said here before, i don't like it. everybody is pushing so hard for electric cars, but it really doesn't solve the big problem that cars are a shitty way to get people where they need to go. electric cars are basically just as shitty as petroleum cars at getting people where they need to go and this perpetuates the misconception that a problem is being solved. ~a
[2022-08-25 13:53:18] - a: My Twitter feed (not representative of the twitter population in general) was almost universally critical (often highly) of the move. A little surprisingly, I didn't see TOO much support for it outside of my twitter feed. A few people were like, "If you paid off your student loans and are mad somebody who hasn't is getting some help you are a bad person" but that was about it. -Paul
[2022-08-25 13:51:37] - So, California is (perhaps) moving to ban the sale of new all-gasoline powered personal vehicles by 2035. 12-13 years is a long time, but that feels aggressive, all the same, for a government to do, even one as influential and historically progressive as California's. -- Xpovos
[2022-08-25 13:46:40] - eh the only super hard left sub i would think would respond that way would be /r/politics or /r/worldnews - mig
[2022-08-25 13:22:23] - a: Makes sense. I'm glad to see they have what seems like a pretty sober view of the situation in that it's a bad non-solution to a problem. -Paul
[2022-08-25 13:17:48] - paul: I figured they'd be for it. Not necessarily left or right. ~a
[2022-08-25 12:51:28] - a: Surprised because you assumed they would be further left or right? I could see reddit leaning pretty liberal, but the econ section leaning right. -Paul
[2022-08-24 21:31:16] - -- Xpovos
[2022-08-24 21:31:13] - a: Reddit users aren't particularly representative, unfortunately.
[2022-08-24 18:42:27] - mig/paul: i'm a bit surprised how moderate the top /r/economics responses are: #1 "The only reason college is so expensive is because they know they can charge whatever they want and the government will pay. Take away fed backed money and WAAAY less people will be willing to pay 30-50k per year." #2 (compromise) instead of paying off student loans, change interest rates. #4 "Bribing the taxpayer right before the midterm elections..." ~a
[2022-08-24 18:34:50] - mig: Many of them may never have graduated at all. Drop-out rates are still quite high, but the debt still comes due. -- Xpovos
[2022-08-24 18:26:58] - "most/many of the recent college grads are defaulting on their loans because they have zero affluence." Still, if those people defaulting didn't take any steps to try and minimize potential debt and are defaulting because they chose non-marketable degrees from unnecessarily expensive schools, I'm not going to be all that sympathetic to that plight. - mig
[2022-08-24 18:26:16] - I'm surprised by how few times I've mentioned subsidies on the board. I found maybe a half-dozen instances when I searched. I guess I just do an "OK" job of not spouting my opinion as much as I feel like I must do, and more talking about things as they are. For the record, nuke the subsidies. All of them. Subsidies are inverse taxes, and far more insidious than any tax. -- Xpovos
[2022-08-24 18:13:26] - paul: "why now?" uber-cynical hot take is this policy is a flat out bribe to stoke voter enthusiasm among a block that skews dem for the upcoming mid terms. - mig
[2022-08-24 18:05:30] - ah i watched the video in a small version, it's at the end and now i guess it looks like he's on a scooter. (i'm very pro-scooter if it matters) ~a
[2022-08-24 18:04:30] - a: https://twitter.com/allofthebikes/status/1562442092395495424 In this video? I didn't see it. Unless you are referring to the person taking the video. -Paul
[2022-08-24 17:59:39] - also you have a terrible perspective: 5% of dc's commutes are by bike. if they all switched to cars the terrible traffic in dc would become . . . more . . . untenable? ~a
[2022-08-24 17:58:11] - there was a bike in the bike lane dude. ~a
[2022-08-24 17:58:10] - a: It doesn't help that the handle is: All of the Bikes -Paul
[2022-08-24 17:57:51] - a: Speaking of tweets. I saw your like of that video of the person presumably biking past a bunch of cars stuck in traffic. It actually took me awhile to figure out the point of the video wasn't to show how there were no bikes using the bike lane.
-Paul[2022-08-24 17:32:36] - a: "can we ALSO both agree that we MUCH more desperately need to curb fossil fuel subsidies?" Pretty sure there is probably evidence on the message board going back 20 years of me being against fossil fuel subsidies. Yes. I don't know enough about the level of subsidies to say for sure whether we "MUCH more desperately" need to curb them, but I'm all for eliminating probably all subsidies for private industries by the federal gov. -Paul
[2022-08-24 17:03:47] - "99 percent of coal is priced at less than half its true cost" ugh, wtf. i hate the world. ~a
[2022-08-24 16:57:12] - paul: (btw, i didn't come up with that hypothetical 20 years on my own. this link also used 20 years as their example) ~a
[2022-08-24 16:51:07] - paul: can we ALSO both agree that we MUCH more desperately need to curb fossil fuel subsidies? ~a
[2022-08-24 16:50:37] - paul: regardless it's dumb as it's proposed now. but dumb on a small small scale? borderline-whataboutism: much bigger problems are fossil fuel subsidies. check my math, "Fossil Fuels Received $5.9 Trillion In Subsidies in 2020" and "Limiting loan forgiveness to $10,000, as President Biden has proposed, would cost about $373 billion". so if we hypothetically spread that over 20 years: that's 18 billion/year vs 5900 billion/year. ~a
[2022-08-24 16:50:01] - paul: yeah, any compromise i'd propose wouldn't be perfect (i don't have a good response to the "what about people who worked through school" except that a lot of those people STILL have loans) but would be better than the 10k we're seeing today. ~a
[2022-08-24 16:45:34] - a: Sure, and if you want a compromise I could maybe support? I guess that's it. Offer some sort of trade-off like this. -Paul
[2022-08-24 16:34:05] - yeah, maybe i shouldn't have made in an equivalent, you're right. but it's publicly funded. so it's . . . a bit of a sticky wicket. ~a
[2022-08-24 16:34:03] - (I guess the military does sometimes refer to it as student loan forgiveness, but it seems pretty different than having to do nothing and getting your loans wiped out). -Paul
[2022-08-24 16:32:19] - a: How is giving up years of your life working for the military the equivalent of student loan forgiveness? -Paul
[2022-08-24 16:31:07] - paul: "joined the military to get free school or whatever" this is a weird example you might want to avoid. that's student loan forgiveness by another name. ~a
[2022-08-24 16:29:42] - a: I would much rather try to solve the issue with high cost of higher ed than forgive student loans. Hard for me to envision any student loan forgiveness that isn't unfair in some way. Even targeting lower incomes ignores those that went to cheaper schools or worked while going to school or joined the military to get free school or whatever. -Paul
[2022-08-24 16:28:08] - a: "i'm not at all worried about the inflation issues you brought up" Why not? Instead of making payments to pay down debt, now these people have more money to spend on stuff. I realize those payments have been suspended for awhile so it's not a new development, but resuming loan payments could help dampen the velocity of money and this seems like it will just increase it. It's not too different from another stimulus payment. -Paul
[2022-08-24 16:26:17] - a: "actual studies show that it doesn't reward generally affluent college grads" Interesting. I've read that studies show the opposite.
Maybe it's semantics/poor wording on my part? I'm saying they are generally affluent among the US population, not affluent among college grads. -Paul[2022-08-24 16:25:56] - paul: how about a compromise: what if you could make the amount much smaller: and somehow only give it to people who have small incomes . . . as a ONE TIME thing (very much related to covid) so maybe then the perverse incentives would be dampened. sigh, i know *you'd* still be against it, but that compromise would be something i'd consider. i'm not at all worried about the inflation issues you brought up, nobody is being "showered". ~a
[2022-08-24 16:20:23] - paul: "It rewards generally affluent college grads" apparently this part is wrong though. it rewards college grads, but actual studies show that it doesn't reward generally affluent college grads. most/many of the recent college grads are defaulting on their loans because they have zero affluence. i'm not arguing for student loan forgiveness (how it's proposed), but please don't assume it's going to the "wrong people". ~a
[2022-08-24 16:14:21] - a: vehemently? -Paul
[2022-08-24 16:13:50] - wow, virulent was the wrong word there
~a[2022-08-24 16:13:28] - paul: because it's not. ~a
[2022-08-24 16:13:12] - a: I'm trying to keep an open mind, but I really can't find anybody who can explain why this is good policy at all. -Paul
[2022-08-24 16:13:02] - paul: i uuuuh, don't have an answer for you. i think i'm probably on your side, but maybe less virulently. i think even many smart progressives secretly think that student loan forgiveness creates really perverse incentives (i was typing this before your last message, but yeah it looks like we agree). ~a
[2022-08-24 16:12:30] - None of the underlying issues are solved at all. In fact, forgiving those loans seem like it would just incentivize schools raising prices even more and people willing to pay it because it might get forgiven in the future. Might even see rates increase as a result. Lastly.... why now? We're in a big inflationary period and so we choose NOW to basically shower a bunch of people with $10k of money? -Paul
[2022-08-24 16:10:44] - paul: i saw your tweet this morning. ~a
[2022-08-24 16:10:25] - Can anybody explain to me why the announced student loan forgiveness is a good idea? Ignoring the fact that the President can apparently arbitrarily just wave away all of this debt without any kind of vote, how is this remotely good policy? It rewards generally affluent college grads and punishes all the people who were responsible and took out smaller loans or paid them off. It's regressive. -Paul
[2022-08-24 15:09:10] - agreed. ~a
[2022-08-23 21:02:08] - a: I had issues with how Roe was decided and the inflexibility of making abortion a "right" instead of just keeping it a federal (or state) law, but the specifics around it in terms of prohibiting bans in the ~first trimester was reasonable considering where Americans stand. -Paul
[2022-08-23 15:42:30] - paul: that's pretty close to what we had with roe. (they had defined the three trimesters, and put very different rules into each trimester. it didn't ban anything federally, but i do see the rules defined by roe as to be very similar to your compromise). ~a
[2022-08-23 15:42:09] - paul: i'm down with that. ~a
[2022-08-23 15:19:30] - https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx 67% of Americans want abortion to be legal in the first three months of pregnancy and 71% want it illegal in the last three months of pregnancy. -Paul
[2022-08-23 15:18:29] - a: I suspect the majority of Americans would be less angry in an environment with a federally secured right to an abortion in the first 3 months (or if the health of the mother is at risk), and maybe a federal ban on abortion after.... 6 months? Again, with exceptions for the health of the mother. And then let the states legislate the middle ground? -Paul
[2022-08-23 15:15:44] - a: Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others. -- Xpovos
[2022-08-23 15:03:19] - paul: propose a compromise. ~a
[2022-08-23 15:02:07] - a: Probably. It's bizarre to me that we treat abortion as such a binary thing when it feels like this is an area where compromise could really ratchet down the political heat AND accomplish most goals for both sides. -Paul
[2022-08-23 14:51:24] - paul: "but that's notably NOT what we are often talking about", right but should it be what we are often talking about? ~a
[2022-08-23 14:50:50] - a: 3 month old fetuses seem pretty far removed in terms of viability from a 7 month old fetus. Yeah, most abortions are that time range but that's notably NOT what we are often talking about. -Paul
[2022-08-23 14:49:17] - https://www.texastribune.org/2022/06/24/texas-abortion-law-answers/amp/ texas has no exceptions for rape/incest but has one for not just life threatening complications but also “substantial impairment” - mig
[2022-08-23 14:46:51] - mig: yes, sorry. they have exceptions for life, but not health. i was definitely wrong about oklahoma though, sorry about that. i was using this source which separates out "health" before rape, so i guess it got lost in those details. ~a
[2022-08-23 14:44:55] - and I have definitely seen fearmongering that aborting ectopic pregnancies could be made/are illegal. - mig
[2022-08-23 14:44:03] - as mentioned though Oklahoma has a rape/incest exception either way. - mig
[2022-08-23 14:43:35] - when you say “NO exceptions for health” - I would think that included life threatening situations as well. - mig
[2022-08-23 14:21:17] - mig: i don't see any "false" at all. i wasn't discussing miscarriages or ectopic pregnancies or a life-threatening emergency. from my first link: skull-less, parent-less, rape victim, dead fetus, these were the examples. ~a
[2022-08-23 14:18:02] - paul: or even a 3 month old fetus? 99% of the time we're talking about 0-4 months. source. ~a
[2022-08-23 13:58:04] - a: It seems a little odd to be totally okay with terminating an 8 month fetus for those same reasons. Or even a 7 month old fetus. -Paul
[2022-08-23 13:57:33] - a: "why didn't you pick 7 months?" Because at 8 months the fetus is more viable and more developed. "it seems like the least arbitrary line you could pick except conception" Maybe? I would argue something like heartbeat or brain waves or viability is less arbitrary. Anyway, I personally don't know where I draw the line, but my point is that IF you are against terminating a 1 day old baby because of circumstances... -Paul
[2022-08-23 05:49:07] - Granted, the pro life rhetoric coming out is certainly causing confusion and causing confusion to providers that may prevent cause women to not be able to get treatment. But also, making hysterical untrue statements about what laws actually say adds to that confusion as well. - mig
[2022-08-23 05:47:35] - I could look up the other states mentioned, but I suspect they also, do have exceptions. - mig
[2022-08-23 05:45:21] - a: Oklahoma, also false. "The only exceptions in the Oklahoma law are to save the life of a pregnant woman or if the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest that has been reported to law enforcement." - mig
[2022-08-23 05:40:21] - " five states (this number is increasing every day) have NO exception for the health of the mother. texas," false, at least as far as the letter of the law is concerned? But obviously, there is much unnecessary confusion which causes problems. - mig
[2022-08-22 19:46:48] - paul: yeah that's why i posted about it. tsla isn't on 2022, but it is on 2020 and 2021. ~a
[2022-08-22 19:46:14] - paul: there's nothing arbitrary about birth. it seems like the least arbitrary line you could pick except conception. ~a
[2022-08-22 19:45:38] - paul: seems like a slippery slope right there. why didn't you pick 7 months? ~a
[2022-08-22 19:45:33] - a: Re: Tesla split. Gotta remember to check fantasy investing! -Paul
[2022-08-22 19:45:11] - a: Where did I get 8 months? I don't know. 9 months is generally thought of as a full pregnancy so I picked that minus one. -Paul
[2022-08-22 19:44:39] - a: It's a slippery slope if you don't think an 8 month fetus still in the womb isn't a life. If you do, then birth seems like an arbitrary line. That's what I am trying to get at. -Paul
[2022-08-22 18:14:12] - paul: there will be a tsla split this thursday. ~a
[2022-08-22 17:33:53] - paul: where did we get 8-month from? ~a
[2022-08-22 17:25:47] - daniel: sure. ~a
[2022-08-22 17:25:39] - a: good for sc2 tonight? -Daniel
[2022-08-22 17:24:55] - paul: it is pretty obviously different in like a dozen ways: functionally different, ethically different, legally different, morally different. it is and it always has been? no doctor has ever confused a fetus from a baby. no human has ever confused a fetus from a baby. we don't even use the same word to describe them. this argument seems patently absurd. ~a
[2022-08-22 17:23:53] - paul: "it really shouldn't be too functionally different terminating an innocent life for bad circumstances regardless of if it was pre or post birth" this seems to be a "slippery slope" argument that i just can't get past. if you're going to "slippery slope" us past the birth of a child, i feel like you can "slippery slope" us past anything. ~a
[2022-08-22 17:19:34] - a: "this has NEVER happened" Yes, I know (or, well, it probably has, but that's not what I was trying to get at). I was saying that IF you think a 8 month old fetus is a life worth protecting.... then it really shouldn't be too functionally different terminating an innocent life for bad circumstances regardless of if it was pre or post birth. -Paul
[2022-08-22 17:17:44] - a: So I was saying that it seems like most pro-life people should be okay with a medical procedure on a dead fetus (although again, I don't claim to speak for them, just speculation on my part). -Paul
[2022-08-22 17:16:58] - a: Yeah, sorry, I was unclear with my first line. This was all speaking for my own opinion, not what is or is not legal / illegal. -Paul
[2022-08-22 16:47:13] - paul: "skull-less and dead fetus seem like pretty clear situations where a medical operation is warranted" are you sure this is strictly true? five states (this number is increasing every day) have NO exception for the health of the mother. texas, oklahoma, arkansas, wisconson, and south dekota include the homes of a huge percentage of americans. "days old baby" lol, no. this has NEVER happened. ever. never ever. ~a
[2022-08-22 16:17:31] - a: (Speaking for my viewpoint). As for the other two? I mean, they seem like trolley problem scenarios to me. Truly awful outcomes regardless. Like, what if that 16 year old loses her parents days after the baby was born? Or a DNA test shows your days old baby was the child of a rapist and not the spouse? Okay to murder the baby in either case? Tough questions. -Paul
[2022-08-22 16:13:01] - a: "are the facts here true?" No idea. Would it surprise me? No. It's a huge country with lots of people and lots of poorly articulated and thought out laws. Wouldn't shock me at all that there are some truly terrible outcomes. "do you guys know how non-pro-choice people would reply to these facts?" Won't claim to speak for them, but the skull-less and dead fetus seem like pretty clear situations where a medical operation is warranted. -Paul
[2022-08-22 16:05:56] - https://i.redd.it/6hoq6pd7m9j91.jpg . . . ignoring the pearl clutching liberal panic parts of this post, are the facts here true? if so, do you guys know how non-pro-choice people would reply to these facts? some states now do not allow exceptions for rape or incest, and now do not allow exceptions for health of the mother, so what is *supposed* to happen in *those* states? ~a
[2022-08-19 17:50:47] - paul: i don't think i ever roomed with a liberal. on the other hand, my opinions on politics have changed since then. ~a
[2022-08-19 17:47:11] - paul: "Here's another smart idea for you". i wonder if any train/boring engineers have looked at this. i have no idea if that's easy to bore or not. (on the other hand, i do like that you're closer to the surface at stops too) ~a
[2022-08-19 17:15:49] - paul: Pretty sure my college roommate first year was / is R. We got along ok. I don't think it would be an issue for the most part. Probably honestly better to make people talk in a situation where they can't just leave and also don't have to be besties. -Daniel
[2022-08-19 16:19:38] - a: https://twitter.com/dalmaer/status/1560404918178947072 Here's another smart idea for you.
-Paul[2022-08-19 14:58:45] - https://twitter.com/JoshKraushaar/status/1560604028995866624 If you were going to college, would you room with somebody of the opposite party? What do you think of people who won't? -Paul
[2022-08-18 18:12:07] - yes i agree, but you have to do both since neither "system" is perfect as you mentioned. ~a
[2022-08-18 16:36:39] - a: Nice! I think intelligence is going to be better than physical surveillance of attack sites, though, typically. Lone wolves who can't be surveiled because they don't give off sufficient warning signs and don't interact with known groups are so rare as to be safely discounted. It's just the intelligence systems are weak and/or bad, for often good political reasons. -- Xpovos
[2022-08-18 16:23:09] - i guess we should catch him while he's still holding the backpack? for what it's worth, that's sorta my job. ~a
[2022-08-18 16:09:14] - a: Are you looking to spot the bomb the terrorist left, or the terrorist himself? If you just want to identify the bomb/threat prior to detonation, looking for unattended backpacks is pretty solid. But that doesn't help you catch the terrorist since, by definition in this problem, he's left the backpack unattended already. -- Xpovos
[2022-08-18 14:58:13] - a: In my experience, all the cool thoughts I've ever had already have some sort of razor or phenomenon or effect named for it. -Paul
[2022-08-18 14:53:43] - yep! can we come up with a deep thought like that one? uuuuh, the best way to catch a subway terrorist is to . . . ummm, don't look for backpacks that are unattended, instead look for backpacks that are, fuck i don't know. make me one, paul. ~a
[2022-08-18 14:51:53] - a: Yeah, the bomber one? I love things like that. -Paul
[2022-08-18 14:51:06] - Daniel: I lost like 3 annoying ranked 1v1s in a row last night after you left, but I won a game where the protoss got his late gam colossus / stalker by using lurkers / hydra! I think they screwed up their micro some, but I was still very happy. -Paul
[2022-08-18 14:24:48] - paul: i've always loved those survivorship bias examples. its stuff like that really blows my mind. whoever came up with any of those cognitive biases is a really deep thinker; i doubt i could come up with one on my own. ~a
[2022-08-17 19:20:41] - paul: according to vdot: "the markings serve to provide a higher level of guidance to bicyclists and motorists sharing the roadway as well as alerting motorists to the lateral position bicyclists are likely to occupy within the traveled roadway" ~a
[2022-08-17 19:19:49] - a: So all lanes are technically sharrows? So weird. Thanks! -Paul
[2022-08-17 19:11:25] - paul: i answered this in our previous conversation: "it just reminds people that bikes can use the entire lane" (also, it depends on the state: for example, in virginia, and a bunch of other states, they have this dumb FTR law and i assume the sharrow overrides any misunderstanding that someone might have about FTR?) ~a
[2022-08-17 19:06:09] - a: Huh... that's a good point. I'm so confused then. How is a sharrow different, then? Can't you drive or bike on a normal lane too? -Paul
[2022-08-17 19:04:32] - https://ew.com/movies/ezra-miller-treatment-complex-mental-issues/ I'm old enough to where I remember a time where insisting somebody refer to you as "they" was already a sign of a mental illness. What kind of bigot does that make me these days? -Paul
[2022-08-17 19:04:04] - paul: "any cyclists I was suddenly paranoid could be in my lane" uuuh, the sharrows changes nothing about whether cyclists will be in your lane. we're in *all* of the lanes, man.
. . . unless you're on the interstate. ~a[2022-08-17 19:00:57] - a: Yeah, I don't recall, sorry. I was too busy trying to follow directions on a new route and trying to avoid running over any cyclists I was suddenly paranoid could be in my lane to have paid attention to those things. I'll try to pay more attention next time. -Paul
[2022-08-17 18:36:07] - a: Yeah, rivers require bridges or tunnels. River tunnels are also subject to flooding and water penetration. Rivers also move over time. All of these are really bad for transit planning and design, so they tend to be weak points. Also, humans often build next to rivers historically due to fresh water access, waste disposal and removal, protection, etc. So most cities have river problems. -- Xpovos
[2022-08-17 18:22:59] - hmmm, yeah, why? what's up with the rivers? during rush-hour i suppose they're a bottleneck? i could imagine that, but i've never witnessed it myself. i've always found the rivers nice because it was always more calming than the constant starting and stopping you get when in the city/exurbs. ~a
[2022-08-17 18:17:06] - Basically, WMATA is saying hell no to any expansion until the bottlnecks (notably Rosslyn) gets attention, which seems fair. But at the same time all these Virginia lawmakers and transit people are (properly, IMO) clamoring for better/more options. It all comes back to the geography (rivers) as always. -- Xpovos
[2022-08-17 18:16:14] - wow, that's quite the expansion. ~a
[2022-08-17 18:15:36] - a: https://wtop.com/tracking-metro-24-7/2021/10/metro-extension-to-triangle-would-cost-27-billion/ -- Xpovos
[2022-08-17 17:59:13] - paul: oh also, there's the asl in the middle lanes, but i assume you'd recognize that as a different thing. ~a
[2022-08-17 17:28:09] - "second rosslyn station"
~a[2022-08-17 17:25:25] - xpovos: i see blue line mentioned in your previous link, but it seems to only discuss arlington. ~a
[2022-08-17 17:24:02] - paul: also replace "turn left" with "go straight" if there were any right-only lanes. ~a
[2022-08-17 17:23:01] - paul: well ok, *in general* i'd expect a sharrow in a middle lane if somebody wanted to make it clear that bikes would be trying really hard to get over to the left-hand side of the roadway to make a left turn at a light or intersection of some sort. (a very silly question, because you said it was urban area) were there any intersections or any reasons anybody would ever want to turn left? ~a
[2022-08-17 17:22:07] - wow i didn't hear about the blue line thing. south to where? ~a
[2022-08-17 17:21:28] - a: It's not. Which feels very... silly. They're also looking into talking about looking into extending the Blue line south to where I could pick it up, which would be interesting. But again, it's all very silly. -- Xpovos
[2022-08-17 17:20:09] - paul: sharrows always have a weird arrow at the top. also, they're very wide, like you can fit a car in if you want. the issue you're running into (is this a bike lane?!) is an issue that every road-engineer wants to avoid always. i think you'll have trouble confusing them, but i dunno, maybe not?
in dc and nyc, bike lanes are green, bus lanes are red. i'm not sure about maryland. ~a[2022-08-17 17:17:07] - a: Huh. Having trouble finding it now. It was on a weird way to my work office that I hardly ever take. It's not a big deal. I was just thrown off because I was suddenly worried I was in a "bikes only" lane. -Paul
[2022-08-17 17:16:15] - xpovos: it *might* use the wmata metro cards for interoperability? the local lines in my area (ART) use the wmata metro card. i think fairfax county (and herndon etc) use the wmata card for their local lines too? ~a
[2022-08-17 17:13:44] - xpovos: maybe it's not wmata? ~a
[2022-08-17 17:13:33] - xpovos: i'm excited that the purple line is getting a bike path. i ride through there a lot and a bike path in that direction will be greatly utilized by me. same deal with the bike lane along 66, but i have a feeling that the fun of riding along 66 will be mostly choked out due to car exhaust, noise, heat, lack of shade, etc. ~a
[2022-08-17 17:12:21] - https://www.wmata.com/initiatives/strategic-plans/2025.cfm -- Xpovos
[2022-08-17 17:09:12] - a: No, no purple line. Though, to be fair to this document, neither does the WMATA initiatives page. -- Xpovos
[2022-08-17 17:08:18] - paul: no, the previous discussion that revolved around sharrows was about a bike going the wrong way on a road (this is 100% illegal). and/or if bikers needed to give 3-feet when under-taking cars (no such 3-foot law exists for undertaking in virginia, maryland, or dc). weirdly enough we had some of that conversation at a baseball game and i went to the first baseball game in years last night. ~a
[2022-08-17 17:05:57] - paul: can you give me the cross-streets? (or any info on one of the streets or nearby landmarks?) without looking at it on streetview i can only make guesses. ~a
[2022-08-17 17:05:18] - a: Did we already discuss this? Should I just go back and check the previous convo?
-Paul[2022-08-17 17:05:01] - a: What exactly is the point of having it be the middle lane? Doesn't a side lane make so much more sense? -Paul
[2022-08-17 17:04:39] - a: As I was writing it, I remembered I had what felt like a very similar question before, but didn't know how to search for it.
My memory is so bad. I'm already repeating stories like an 80 year old. -Paul[2022-08-17 17:02:36] - then there is the best of the best: pedestrian+public-transportation only areas. and i can't think of anything better than that. ~a
[2022-08-17 17:02:25] - paul: i hate sharrows. i prefer "🚲 may use full lane" signs because they are way more specific and direct. even better are bike lanes, except when people drive or stop in them, which is always. even better are protected bike lanes because people have a harder time parking in them. even better is a continuous sidewalk because it flips the script on who is in who's space. ~a
[2022-08-17 17:02:19] - xpovos: i agree. more data collection, information dissemination, and education almost always helps everything. that area has changed SO MUCH in the past 10 years too. i only skimmed the pdf, does it even mention the purple line ffs? ~a
[2022-08-17 17:00:53] - a: Absolutely, the ideal case would be a job shift, but that isn't reasonable, as you noted. At least not for a bit. My thesis is that any (transportation) plan should be reviewed more frequently than once per decade; and in the event of a major crisis that impacts it. I think this is part of why everything feels 10-years out of date everywhere. We're making assumptions on old data constantly. -- Xpovos
[2022-08-17 16:49:09] - paul: you can bike on it or drive on it. ~a
[2022-08-17 16:48:40] - paul: wow that's a blast from the past. "Paul: youre talking about a "sharrow" (shared arrow). It's an arrow with a biker symbol on a normal road. Theyre all over alexandria, Arlington, etc. It just means it's a "shared use" road. You can drive or bike on it. ..." you had this same confusion in alexandria. no the middle lane is not only for bikes. ~a
[2022-08-17 16:38:46] - a: Oh, hey, driving rules regarding bikes question: I was driving in Silver Spring (I think) in an urban-ish area with three lanes. The middle lane had a bike icon on it. What does this mean? The middle lane is only for bikes? That bikes can ride in the middle lane but not others? Why would it be the middle lane and not one to the side? -Paul
[2022-08-17 15:26:26] - mig: Oh, that's interesting. I understand the vitriol. He challenges a lot of the far left orthodoxies on stuff and that often provokes some of the strongest outrages. Just look at how Glenn Greenwald or Bari Weiss are treated. But I feel like even if you hate him, you have to admit what he's done with Tesla and SpaceX is damned impressive. -Paul
[2022-08-17 15:24:33] - https://twitter.com/AlexNowrasteh/status/1559897191946326018 Not gonna lie, that fourth option made me laugh. I know, I'm a horrible person. -Paul
[2022-08-17 15:03:16] - mig: ok. i think he's overrated but probably not terribly so. we might agree on his rated-ness. to paul's point, i might put him in the top 10 businessmen because he does show some crazy results most days. ~a
[2022-08-17 15:01:39] - a: I understand the "he's overrated" sentiment. I don't quite get the level of vitriol I see about him. It feels like people "orange man bad"-ing, or I guess in this case "telsa man bad"-ing. - mig
[2022-08-17 14:52:42] - a: I think he easily qualifies as a top 5 innovator / entrepreneur / businessman of my lifetime and I think I would probably put him #1? Kind of waiting to see how things play out with FSD and some of his side hustles outside of SpaceX. I think he has a slight edge over Jobs and Bezos and Gates right now for me. -Paul
[2022-08-17 14:46:20] - paul: what would you name him? ~a
[2022-08-17 14:29:27] - aDaniel: To be clear, I'm not saying I would name him my "greatest human alive", but it just seems like if you're winning the vote for that, you should have a strong claim to Mount Rushmore of most successful people.
-Paul[2022-08-17 13:15:27] - xpovos: what's your thesis? (i clicked on your link, and i actually know that area somewhat: i use that area to get from the capital crescent trail to sligo and/or rock creek park). i feel like someone objective would probably suggest someone in your position to change jobs or move for your job. and often neither of those are tenable. ~a
[2022-08-17 12:10:14] - there isn't much that has changed to note. But almost 9 years later, including a crisis moment which dramatically impacted transportation in a lot of ways probably means it's overdue for revision, yeah? Oh, and the base has a massive construction plan that isn't even covered by this. Fantastic. -- Xpovos
[2022-08-17 12:09:10] - Been poking around on my transportation issues. Finally found this: https://www.ncpc.gov/files/projects/Naval_Support_Activity_Bethesda_Draft_Installation_Master_Plan_Transportation_Management_Program_MP059_Nov2013.pdf That's the most recent version I've been able to find, and it is obviously laughably out of date. But a lot of work goes into these things, so changing them all of the time is obviously painful, too, particularly when ...
[2022-08-17 05:13:04] - Greatest is a very broad category (see all my rando nominations earlier). Even at greatest CEO I'd probably go Gates over Musk. Though I would admit I'd probably need to do some research to feel better about nominating anyone to that title. -Daniel
prev <-> next