davidw

This is not actually a thing that happens because 'someone built an apartment building'.

You bought a property, not the entire neighborhood or city. Those do not belong to you.

Cities change and adapt over time.

"Destroy" - see, that's the kind of rhetoric we hear when it turns out they're building like a small apartment building or something.

Change happens one way or another. If a place has 10 homes and 100 people want to live there, you can either 1) build more homes or 2) see the 10 wealthiest of those 100 people eventually get the housing in that place. Both are pretty significant change, just one is more visible because you can see the homes that got built, rather than the less wealthy people priced out.

It's pretty frustrating to see the downvotes for someone who has actually been to housing hearings, something I doubt most people on this site have taken the time to do.

This statement is accurate, too.

I think their concerns about automobiles are actually genuine if overblown. People freak out about car stuff.

I do see 'concern trolling' as well. For instance I live in a place that doesn't see a lot of rain, so people will come out and "what about the WATER for those apartments?!" thinking they've found a gotcha, even while they themselves have a big green lawn and even if municipal use of water is a tiny fraction of the area's water

https://www.centraloregonlandwatch.org/update/2021/5/5/droug...

My experience is mostly with the car-oriented city I live in; I can't speak as much to what it might look like elsewhere.

I'm skeptical. People seem to complain most of all because 1) they view the function of a city as moving and storing automobiles and anything that might hypothetically get in the way of that is bad ("we should only build these homes if they come with a massive amount of parking and generate no traffic!") or 2) just plain aversion to change, which is more understandable.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't push for things like single stair reform that could lead to more fine-grained, incremental urbanism.

I've been to a number of housing hearings and listened to what people actually say on the public record, and "I'd support this if it were more broken up" is not a thing I've heard. On the other hand "this is a NICE neighborhood and we do not want apartments here" is pretty common.

I just took down part of our trampoline this morning, and it gave me the sads, because our kids have used the heck out of it over the years. When they were smaller they'd ask me to 'bounce' them, and they'd scream happy screams as they flew into the air. I was wondering myself if it'd end up being one of those things they used for a week and grew bored of, but they enjoyed it for years.

Oh that's good news. I wrote in to support HB4080 here in Oregon, but it didn't go anywhere during this year's short session, so will hopefully come back around for the session next year.

It seems like the site ought to provide more clarity around that, though.

How does this work legally? I thought balcony solar was only legal in Utah in the US?

They seem to have tried and given up in the US as well outside of an online presence. It's a pity, as they make 'ok' gear at good prices. It's perfect for if you're getting into a sport, or know you're going to use it only casually and don't want to spend a lot on high-end gear, but want to avoid getting something that's completely cheap junk.

Breaking things is also a lot easier than building complex things.

"No shit?" jokes aside, it seems like a bad corporate strategy. Rather than owning up and doing what they can to protect their customers, they kept trying to hide, and now Taylor Farms is going to forever be associated in customers minds with explosive diarrhea.

What are the rules around pacers for this kind of thing? Are there separate records for with/without pacers?

Elixir/Erlang works very well in a semi-embedded environment where you need a higher level command and control component that behaves in a deterministic way and is pretty robust.

I was involved, years ago, in using Erlang on these devices: https://www.icare-world.com/us/product/icare-eidon/

It was a lot of fun and there were some very interesting challenges for everyone involved.

When people have a lot of choices, that can create problems, because it's often the people with the least information trying to make that choice.

For instance "I'm new to Lisp, I want to try one..." is a person without a lot of background and information to make that choice. And they probably realize it and it makes them nervous about making that choice.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Paradox_of_Choice

Ok I'm picturing one of those scenes from the original Star Trek where the computer melts down in a blaze of sparks when I sing to it.

Where is it getting more tokens in the same source file? Like if you kept minimizing what you're feeding it, what accounts for the difference?

What I'm curious about is how a young programmer in, say, Sicily or Finland or somewhere who is a student or doesn't have a lot of spare cash, is going to deal with a world where everything is predicated on access to expensive tokens controlled by megacorporations, or where even 'open source' models require fairly expensive hardware to run.

That potentially consumes a lot more resources than the very negligible marginal wear and tear that using a work computer would cause.

Oh no, I died of dysentery.

And now we have a guy with dementia, which got kind of ignored by the media while they hyped up the other guy's decline.

People did actual research on how much the 'old!' thing was very inconsistent in narrative and framing:

https://css.seas.upenn.edu/new-york-times-a-case-study-in-in...

Framing someone who supports democracy vs someone who tried to overturn a free and fair election as a 'weaker' candidate is kind of the problem though. In any sane world, you'd support a literal corpse over a guy who does not want there to be free and fair elections.

This explains the problem with it:

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

It's fine if you're talking about something where there are a broad spectrum of fairly reasonable policy positions. It's not fine when you have a TV segment that's like "here's Christina, an astrophysicist from Stanford, explaining how we measure the circumference of the earth, and up next we'll have Bob from the flat earth society"

After subscribing for 15 years or so, I noped out after their "walker" cover. The world has enough "both sides" journalism, and I had thought them somewhat immune from that.

People are already sour on the economy. They are going to be in a whole mood if we get a real, serious recession.

That area still has some 'gold rush' mentality to it, where people want to get in, make their money and get out. That doesn't foster much of a long-term attitude that pays attention to local politics. Also some of the local politics are totally psychotic, like the guy harassing Scott Wiener.

There's a huge difference between 'pro market' and 'buddies with some big businesses' and this administration is making it very clear, at least to those who would see.

https://blog.supplysideliberal.com/post/47857230937/luigi-zi...

"We've been trying to contact you about your extended chariot warranty"

It's all about housing and the rampant NIMBYism that drove prices up in the 'desirable' places.