"Remigration" will improve humanity?
You either know this, or willfully ignore. Can't say which is worse.
262 karma · joined March 8, 2011
You either know this, or willfully ignore. Can't say which is worse.
How about we fix basic issue as a species first, before going all robots and AI and trips to Mars?
That means Zigbee and Zwave and use them with Home Assistant. There are many locks and devices which support either. There's a learning curve in the beginning, but once you set it up correctly not only you get privacy and control your own devices, you also get far more options for automations and useful or plain cool things in general.
If every dev took the path of least resistance, and did the easiest thing that did its task, we would lose 80% of all tech jobs. This would only funnel more money to billionaires and share holders instead of the employees. Why would we want that.
How about fix the country public transport first instead of spending 2 Trillion on BS AI?
Have 2 of them and work great.
"Clarity Media, which is the parent company of the Denver Gazette and is owned by GOP billionaire Phil Anschutz, purchased the assets and rights."
Now read his wikipedia page.
The first iPhone/Android were great innovations. And subsequent iterations occasionally added better features -- but not each year.
Phones are one example, but all we are doing is shoving more carbon the air, putting more trash on the streets and land fills, more water for datacenters, more plastic and chemicals in the oceans and our bodies.
This is understandable, but does not always make sense. After all, these towns were created by European immigrants who left their homeland of hundreds of years, their language, customs, foods, climate etc for a better opportunity. These towns had sizable black populations who left southern towns for the same reasons.
Before Europeans, north america was settled by many different tribes who had migrated from eurasia . Not to mention different groups of humans also migrated from Africa all over the world, because they saw good reason to do so.
At some point you have to cut your losses, or seek a better life. Not saying it is easy, but this option should be pointed out to anyone in untenable situations.
Also, all the proposed HSR corridors are in populated areas. The population density of the north east is similar to Japan but with twice the Japanese per capita gdp.
None of what you said explains why US cities which are similar to size and population as EU ones have such poor public transport.
People in the US have become proficient at justifying their delusions.
The US spent 2-3 trillion in Iraq and Afghan to achieve nothing. But no complaints are offered, no one is punished. Imagine if that money had gone to health care or HSR/transit with even 10% goals met.
And in today's socio-political climate, a politician has to simply call HSR "socialism" or some trigger word and even so called liberals will rally against HSR.
You were never given a choice. Read up on the history of how mass transit in the US was systematically underfunded, and continues to be attacked by parties who stand to benefit.
The opposition to HSR or mass transit in the US is no different than the opposition to single payer and/or universal healthcare, which somehow all other developed countries have managed to implement with far superior outcomes.
You do know you can have the best of both? Germany (where BMWs, Mercs, Audis are made), France, Japan, Switzerland etc have no shortage of easy, high end mass public transport with luxurious options for long trips. Or you buy/rent cars if you need to drive, or insist on driving.
If a Texan could get by with $500 a month on public transport, instead of $1000 on a car, they could go on a long vacation, and rent a Ferrari with the money saved in a year.
This happens often in many towns in the US, but its not permanent. And people never seem to make the connection that the "great time" they had walking the streets was due to no cars. The business owners do not want the car ban to be permanent, as they think cars are the only way to get regular traffic.
" Since its inception in 2008, the Group has issued 18 letters and members have testified before Legislative and Congressional committees 15 times. In reviewing past letters and testimony, a consistent theme emerges: 1) project costs, schedules, and ridership estimates are uncertain and subject to significant risk of deteriorating, a typical experience for mega-projects; 2) the project is underfunded, and its financing is unstable, raising costs and making effective management difficult if not impossible; 3) more legislative oversight is needed. This letter reinforces the message, but with a sense of urgency over the ever-higher stakes.[6] "
Also: "Per the 2023 Project Status Report, the authority indicated the Interim IOS will go into service before December 31, 2030, with a "risk factor" of three years (which runs until the end of 2033)."
In the period between 2008-2023, several other countries (not just China) have started and completed many HSR projects.
You will see highways with 55 lanes each way, but you won't see an operational high speed train in the US. There are simply too many people opposed to any kind of real progress in this direction, and even the proponents of HSR or mass public transit have no shortage of excuses.
Furthermore, HSR also requires some level of last mile connectivity by local mass public transit. There is none of that in places like Texas, and again the public imagination has not moved on from some kind of 1950s car culture utopia, thats about "freedom".
In reality, cars are parked 90% of the time, and driven by tired, frustrated drivers in bumper to bumper traffic for the rest of the time.
The reality is that 20% of Texans (also other cities/states) spend $1000 or more a month on car. In many areas in the US, cars are the number 2, sometimes number 1 expense.
Here is a mass transit map of Berlin vs Houston: https://i.imgur.com/HwBGUcU.jpg
There is no HSR happening. Americans have dug a hole so deep with car culture and other Nimby delusions such as "what will happen to my home values", that there is no coming back from this.
Depending on the house, location and condition, adding exterior or interior insulation and/or aero barrier, or spray foam could be more cost effective and not so invasive as you think.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nOI99ew5MM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYjF1afRqvE
This is a pretty broad topic, and you can watch videos from this channel to learn more: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dReyrSGokEQ
There are options to do a full passive house retrofit, or just add exterior insulation if you have the funds and inclination. Plus you can get better air quality with filtered air, lower mold/pollen issues, lower noise if you care about that and overall home comfort.
https://www.buildwithrise.com/stories/passive-house-retrofit...
If possible and if you have the funds, try to do a retrofit: https://ekobuilt.com/2019/04/24/retrofitting-an-older-home-t...
https://www.buildwithrise.com/stories/passive-house-retrofit...
You don't have to do all the the things to improve performance -- you can pick and choose.
No heat pump will help if your house is leaky or under insulated.
What a joke.
https://www.publichealth.columbia.edu/public-health-now/news...