Hacker News Reader

The issue is not reporting these issues I find, its actually getting action. I used to reach out to my city representatives about these sorts of things. At this point, I've given up on that, realizing that I will never have my position actually heard unless I represent either a very large sum of money or an overwhelming majority of the people who actually vote in these local elections. They have no incentive to work for individual or minorities of their constituency. They alienate me they lose a measly one vote. They alienate an important donor and they can't afford to pitch themselves to voters and even run.

Politicians don't fight for you, they fight for the betterment of their political careers and their own position. If they were in the job to actually quickly address and fix these sorts of local grievances, there wouldn't be so many of them left to address in the first place.

Even funnier: they've somehow managed to convince everyone to defend and promote this system!

Truth is stranger than fiction as they say.

Well, the alternative to complaining and having nothing done is complaining and being disappeared, so there's that

Thanks nudge economics and Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith–Mundt_Act & https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Authorization....

Surely folks aren't generally so unimaginative they think the only two options are "shitty" and "shittier".

Anyway, given our massive encarceration rate and our love of solitary confinement, being "disappeared" is not out of the question. Hell, Georgia is trying to prosecute protestors with RICO charges. The federal government itself makes no effort to hide the fact that it salivates over punishing Snowden for publicly embarrassing them. The idea that we have some sort of special immunity to politically-oriented violence from the state is fairly naïve. (Not to mention the fact that the rest of American society will absolutely punish you for your political views if you're outspoken in the wrong context or have the wrong opinion—god forbid you point out how useless voting is, even if it has non-zero value.)

> Surely folks aren't generally so unimaginative they think the only two options are "shitty" and "shittier".

Thinking in false dichotomies is the human default in my experience.

It is one of the most dangerous markets to compete in, and often leads to one's demise, but I don't see it as an absolute guarantee. Regardless, lots of historic undertakings (and accomplishments) with outsized rewards came with substantial risk....maybe modern Westerners have become too soft to be the masters of our own destiny.

100 years ago people complained but they managed to build big things too. No secret police required either.

If you can mobilize enough people to make a stink, councils will give you whatever it takes to make you go away.

Even if politicians were entirely pure and good, the calculus yields a bias towards non-action.

Each and every decision will piss someone off. Now or any time in the future. Some of the enraged can make a stink. It's very hard to predict negative outcomes. So the best strategy is to play it safe.

Then add corruption, incompetence, fossilized worldviews, and pathologically power obsessed try hards.

Politics is just the worst. And unfortunately necessary.

So many issues come down from the fact these people need to campaign to keep their jobs. Imagine if the sewer department operated like this, with engineers fretting over if they should actually tear up the street and fix the main or if that would piss off some wealthy donors to their reelection bid, instead of just doing work that is known by domain experts to be unequivocally required according to the realities of the situation.

It’s funny how in the supposedly late capitalist world of contemporary America, there are lots of problems that could be solved by money/business/entrepreneurship but are prevented from doing so by not-actually-representative government councils and arbitrary laws.

Two examples that pop out to me are litter/graffiti removal and clean public bathrooms. Millions of people would gladly pay $10-$50 a year to get both, but regulations prevent a private company from even beginning to solve either.

The train station I get off at has probably two dozen LED signs. Each one of them just shows the date and time, and not when the next train is coming or anything actually useful to transit riders. But I'm sure they cost a few thousand a piece and parts are expensive for what amounts to a wall clock mounted every 10 feet, and whoever signed off on this station projects probably cut a huge red ribbon with the biggest grin on their face for the press photos.

I agree with this.

Well if you think about it from a more… zoomed out perspective. Why should they take YOUR opinion as the truth to execute? Not saying you’re wrong, but it’s very easy to find someone that disagrees with you on whatever topic you want. So which person are they representing more? Where do you draw the line?

They could start by at least following their own ideas and rules. There are so many sidewalks for example that are completely upended by tree roots in my area. City rules say a sidewalk should be flat and not look like the Front Range. This is one of the wealthiest parts of the world for reference, why are we tolerating stuff like this for the elderly and disabled? There's more than enough money available, just a lack of any altruism.

Most of the existing entries look like annoyances for pedestrians and cyclists.

When these nuisance topics come up on existing community forums, like NextDoor, Reddit, or City-Data, somebody usually knows somebody who knows somebody from city planning that confirms that it's an known annoyance but a compromise solution for a complex or expensive problem that needs to meet many needs.

This crosswalk light needs to accommodate some critical car traffic issue, that bike lane inefficiency is the optimal solution given the inability to expand the road any wider, etc.

How does your catalog go from being a wiki of annoyances that highlight intractable problems to something in dialog with the civil engineering professionals who need to weight many constraints?

As a software professional, my nightmare would be somebody maintaining a permanent, public, antagonistic list of all the forced compromises I'm already frustrated with in my software. I know they're there and I hate them too, but that doesn't mean they're accidents.

I'm not convinced that all of these annoyances are intentional. For example, one post [1] says that it's not clear where to go at the end of a bike path. This could be resolved with a sign that might cost $500 (complete guess) to install, and there are no complex constraints in the way of installing a sign. Another post [2] highlights discontinuities on the edge of two municipal jurisdictions. Again, a reasonable fix here does not require impeding car traffic or making any huge redesigns that require a civil engineer.

It's not possible for the committee that's in charge of planning an entire city to be intimately familiar with the nuances of the way every intersection works for every driver, walker, and biker that pass through them every day. The people who pass through these intersections every day, though, will understand the design oversights and deteriorations. Some proposed fixes will be feasible, others might not. I think my major goal with a site like this is to get the public involved and talking among themselves.

Perhaps it's too idealistic, but I see the process of building a city to be almost entirely distinct from delivering a software product. Every resident owns their city, and though there is a group of people that are paid to maintain it, it's every resident's right and responsibility to make the city work for them.

[1]: https://littlefixes.xyz/city/boston/fix/5 [2]: https://littlefixes.xyz/city/palo-alto/fix/2

> This could be resolved with a sign that might cost $500 (complete guess) to install

There's no non-offensive way to say this, so I'll just say it: if you're just randomly guessing anyway, why not pull a different number out of your head? Why not $50, or $5000?

> and there are no complex constraints in the way of installing a sign.

That you know of, and given your guess of how much it costs to install a sign, I'm guessing there's lots about building out civic infrastructure that you don't know about.

And I don't either! We have a big road nearby that's a nightmare to cross. There's some limply blinking signs that drivers mostly ignore, and I'd love to have the city put in something better - humps, actual stop lights, etc - but there are measures in place to stop that from just happening over a weekend.

do you know any better, or are you talking out your ass just as much as you're accusing the parent of?

i have worked for a municipal government, and part of my job was installing signs in bike lanes. $500 is a pretty spot-on estimate. a sign is $50-$100 per unit at the size you'd install in a bike lane, paying the sign company to do the design and setup was about $200 (less if it's in MUTCD), paying two people (city work needs two people to do anything) to drive out and install it would be about another $100. add another $50 or so if you need to install a new break-off post. we did this multiple times in response to citizen requests, without any red tape beyond the approval of my boss who was the lowest possible level of boss in the municipal government.

> As a software professional, my nightmare would be somebody maintaining a permanent, public, antagonistic list of all the forced compromises I'm already frustrated with in my software. I know they're there and I hate them too, but that doesn't mean they're accidents.

I take it you’ve never worked in OSS.

It's why I avoid it!

haha, completely agree! im still in denial about how terrible and useful seeing the misery splayed out is

One a basic level: the public has a right to opine about public works and to glean insight into the decision process behind them, even if the rationale behind the public’s grievances is ultimately not well founded.

(In my experience, the rationale for public layouts is “first come first serve,” meaning that the original civil engineer made a subjective design call decades ago and every subsequent change has simply accommodated it. In that way your comparison to software is apt, except for the part where I have a reasonable expectation of redress against public works and not against you.)

even beyond the annoyances that seems simple but are the result of a complex set of problemss, you've got the annoyances that really should be simple to fix, but are intentionally hostile to inconvenience and deter some demographic.

a lot of city infrastructure is built around keeping away the people who can't afford or aren't old enough to drive.

Yes yes. It’s a real shame and nightmare.

I am so conflicted when it comes to this sort of thing.

On the one hand, simple things can be quickly fixed with a good reporting tool. My city has such a tool and so broken things, signs becoming obscured by foliage, potholes and so on are all dealt with quickly. These are fantastic systems.

On the other hand people Love to complain. And it's always "they" who should do something about it. But they don't like the established time and effort it takes to complain in the right forum (Town meeting, contacting ward Councillor or whatever.) Much easier to go to some unsanctioned Web site and pile on.

Of course the actual biggest complaint is about change. Any change at all. It doesn't matter whether the change is good, or asked for, or desired, there's always someone willing to complain.

This is especially true at the hyper-local level. I'm tangentially involved in a proposed new residential estate. People 3 miles away, with no shared road, are complaining about it based on "increase in traffic". (Their access is from a main road which is busy all day long.) Their argument really boils down to "no change".

Lots of change is good. Some is bad for me, but common good. Some have good ideas, but there are negative side effects. Some have good ideas, but its expensive. Some have good ideas that are prevented by law or bylaw.

So well done on creating a site. More dialog is a good thing. But ultimately it serves little real purpose (other than just general bitching) unless some sort of real-world interaction with city management takes place. And I'm -guessing- most cities will just refer you to their current online system, whatever they use.

It’s a credibility issue in my opinion. When you go to the DMV you see the efficiency at which your local government operates and you think that there is no way in hell someone is actually monitoring the official website, where this is offering the alternative to that, if it’s effective or not is unknown, it’s just a possibility.

https://fixmystreet.org/ (open source) has a similar aim. It comes with a backend for city staff, tracking of updates, notifications etc.

Awesome, thanks for the link!

If there's no licensing problem, could you just import the current OSM polygons for cities?

e.g. Denver - http://polygons.openstreetmap.fr/get_geojson.py?id=1411339&p...

Based on this I found with DDG search: https://peteris.rocks/blog/openstreetmap-administrative-boun...

Probably, yes--thanks for the link. Although I am somewhat hesitant to use official administrative boundaries because I feel like perceived boundaries are often different than official boundaries. As someone walking around the Boston area, or around Stanford, I want the experience to be good everywhere---it doesn't matter much to me whether I'm officially in Boston or Cambridge or Palo Alto or Menlo park.

So these boundaries are sort of meant to be more "places" than specifically cities. But long-term indeed it might not be practical to have these custom boundaries (maybe just removing the boundaries altogether, or loosening them, is the answer)

In my region (an inner suburb of the Northeast Megalopolis) an attempt like this to use vague "place" boundaries would lead to a blur of overlapping boundaries that stretches for ~500 miles.

My city has something similar based on fixmystreet, which is not focused on discussion but more on reporting: https://www.zueriwieneu.ch/reports

I love that my city responds so quick to any issues reported. Usually you get a reply the next day, and minor things are usually resolved within the week. One time a guy even facetimed me to figure out the exact spot where some metal was sticking out of the ground near a playground, which I had reported.

My city is Winter Haven, Florida. I often travel to Lakeland, Hanes City, Davenport, Tampa.

We have an app to report things on but they don’t have enough people. Construction is everywhere for roads. The biggest issues I see in my city is inconsistent in sidewalks. They have it where trees elevate the side walks. They block it off but have yet to fix it. So you have to walk in the road. People block the cross walks. Half of the pedestrians lights don’t work. The City Council and Mayor are rude and don’t listen. My city is very cliche. “Religious people” So, I just stopped saying anything. Lack of action and accountability is the issue. But if police think you are suspicious they will stop you and say hey you were jay walking. But ya your signs don’t work. I stopped walking because they just don’t have any interest in fixing anything. If you have seen some of the people making sharp turns almost running you over you realize they don’t need a SUV, but to be walking with you. I am just worn on the double standards, and entrapment.

How is this different from SeeClickFix, which is working in hundreds of cities?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SeeClickFix

It might not be! One difference between Little Fixes and 311-like apps is that I want to foster discussion among residents rather than offer a place to file complaints with the city. Most of the apps that I’ve seen don’t allow discussion. Perhaps SeeClickFix is different; I haven’t used it.

One difference that I immediately see is that I can see any actual fixes when I go to SeeClickFix’s site. When I go to Little Fixes, I do. And another difference is that I had fun building this one, and I didn’t build SeeClickFix :)

Huh, in Australia most local govts use SnapSendSolve, I assume this is a clone.

This reminds me a bit of the Mystery of the Bloomfield Bridge.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37359193

Basically a foot bridge built over a highway to serve a particular community need. Today, however, it's unused, collects litter and is generally disliked by the community. A platform like Little Fixes is certainly a step in the right direction for city planners to apply their craft where it's needed most. That's assuming they have time and the city has the budget.

This is a cool idea. Going to use this in the neighborhood I'm building a house in where we're all under covenant/private management of everything (even for the roads—no HOA, etc).

I signed up and tried to post but it didn't seem to work. I only see one post in all of Boston and mine aren't appearing.

Shoot! I'm sorry about that, and thank you for letting me know. I just fixed the issue -- I would love for you to try your post again!

Awesome idea. Will check back in when Portland, OR is added as a city also.

Just added it! Feel free to make a post :)

It looks like accounts can be entirely anonymous. How are you planning on handling moderation of comments? What happens if I post on a neighbor's house "jagoff who lets their dogs poop everywhere lives here, please evict"?

really cool, but wish the bounding box on the map was better

Cool idea!

Show HN: Little Fixes – a spatial forum to improve your city