Lord_Baltimore

Most people that are against car-centric cities like myself are not against cars 100% but against their level of priority in the design of our cities and societies.

Many of the scenarios you mentoned aren't even that big of a deal for many. I have walked in the rain many times and somehow I was still ok. You could argue that car culture has made us soft in some ways.

Nevertheless, if we reduced our emphasis on cars in society and the design of our cities to the point where cars were mainly used for those specific cases where cars truly are by far the best options (like ambulances) we would have more livable and walkable cities and ironically cities where it is nicer for those who really really want/need to drive since everyone and their mom wouldn't be driving because they aren't forced to drive to everything. Fewer people clogging the roads like my co-worker who would watch Netflix while she drove to work. Obviously she didn't have a passion for driving but was forced to because she lived in a sprawling metro with terrible transit options.

Not building something because it will allow poorer people to move around our cities more easily is just wrong no matter what the consequences. There are also criminals and kids who strut around and flex from rough areas of town that have cars. Should we get rid of roads that connect those neighborhoods to the rest of the city?

These issues just reveal deep problems we have as a society and the solution we have had so far of trying to avoid it at all costs only making it worse.

Yeah, I don't think you should be able to opt children into atheistic teaching.

The mental gymnastics to justify piracy as anything other than theft is always interesting to watch.

I highly recommend The Dispatch. They make a point of not being click-baity and try to give thoughtful takes instead of reactionary ones.

It is a trade-off which is not always acknowledged. It is not something that has 0 potentially negative consequences. And the competition and innovation that is stifled is often invisible (hard to see what could have been).

If you had less intervention with respect to privacy would there be more dynamic market-driven initiatives to fill the gaps? Would there be more incentive to develop technology that would be effective for privacy? I don't know.

Regulation is just hard because reality is complex and dynamic and regulation is often complex but not very dynamic.

Yes, a pebble in the shoe of Google but could be a mountain in the way of smaller company.

1. No one assumes that they have perfect information. No one says this is perfect just better than the other ways to handle these situations!

2. Who do you think will consistently have better information than someone whose sole goal is to sell these tickets?

3. If they are consistently losing money scalping and not selling tickets they won't be a scalper much longer.

4. This is a dynamic process which can account for changing variables regarding supply and demand quickly as opposed to rules and regulations which do not.

5. If they only sell half the tickets at 4x then they could sell the last half at an extreme discount and make even more than double their investment! Do you think they would rather make more money or less?

I recognize this "absurd" point.

"Unhindered capitalism"

"it has been balanced with more progressive policies."

That doesn't sound like unhindered capitalism.

The original argument is essentially "if this action is so easy then how can you make it illegal?" which is not a very good argument as pointed out. Your argument is about the morality of this action which is quite different.

As a "Calvinist" (I prefer label reformed Christian) it appears as though you have totally misunderstood Calvinism. One of the bedrocks of Calvinism is that every person in his natural state is fundamentally bad and any spiritual/material blessing is undeserved so how could we could we boast?

Commentary from John Calvin on Luke 13:4 where Jesus comments on whether the 18 people killed by a falling tower were bad people because they suffered this fate:

"This passage is highly useful, were it for no other reason than that this disease is almost natural to us, to be too rigorous and severe in judging of others, and too much disposed to flatter our own faults. The consequence is, that we not only censure with excessive severity the offenses of our brethren; but whenever they meet with any calamity, we condemn them as wicked and reprobate persons. On the other hand, every man that is not sorely pressed by the hand of God slumbers at ease in the midst of his sins, as if God were favorable and reconciled to him. This involves a double fault; for when God chastises any one before our eyes, he warns us of his judgments, that each of us may examine himself, and consider what he deserves. If he spares us for a time, we are so far from having a right to take such kindness and forbearance as an opportunity for slumber, that we ought to regard it as an invitation to repentance."

This a very good use case for a cryptocurrency, but in the long run a crypto like NANO might be a better solution with due to quicker transaction times, lack of fees, and much lower environmental impact.

They could also say many other things that aren't true if they wanted to.

>>As soon as the competitors are eliminated you jack the prices up

And then you provide a competitor or startup another opportunity.

Let me introduce you to the fall of man.

>Humans haven't changed much

You are correct, and humans have been greedy, manipulative, and self-centered since the beginning of time. We often don't even see it in ourselves. I'm sure many of these people who contributed to his disillusionment probably thought they weren't too bad...especially when compared with some other person!

>There is no such thing as an absolute truth, after all. And pretending there is, and it's even attainable, is intellectually dishonest.

You seem to be stating this as an absolute truth.

I've done the same thing. And I agree it is low-volume, but I have come to the conclusion that it isn't so bad to be a little "bored" and not get lost in twitter rabbit holes.