hexator

There is an overwhelming amount of racism on this app. Not even accurate racism, just racism.

That's how words form

The article doesn't mention the numerous downsides to pedestrians for diverging diamond interchanges. Four crossing points means a lot more conflict points and a lot more chances for death.

If that results in a net decrease in wellbeing, then no.

I imagine that wouldn't be great for the ecosystem of the interior, which is a freshwater habitat...

Substack is full of this sort of thing, to the point that I immediately look at the author page before reading (probably a good habit to have everywhere, really)

You imply that it's a significant percentage though, which is highly debatable.

How does that work with a app like Discord, which is more like a huge group of villages and not one big village? Will they be able to continually grow by adding more servers without destroying the community? Is that model more sustainable?

Is anyone surprised? It's really eye-opening working at a startup making a huge impact and the company is valuated in the hundreds of millions with only a few engineers. And you just make like $150k, a tiny TINY fraction of the value. Even if you make more than most workers, you're still getting robbed of the true value of your labor.

As the article mentions, their population is threatened mostly by habitat loss due to human development and trophy hunting

Can we get a simpler overview of what this means for a layperson?

Assuming we take his story at face value, from a legal standpoint you are correct. However, if I accidentally ran somebody over and even if I was not at legal fault I would certainly feel guilty and it feels wrong to me how quickly he pushed it off.

I also find it a bit weird he implied he was driving a car but in the news article it said he was driving a motorcycle.

I'm shocked I have to scroll down so far to see someone complain about that. He absolutely is shifting 100% of the blame for him killing someone onto the person he killed.

Twitter's problems began way before the 2016 election.

I don't really think any of those are the problem, they're just being used as weapons by people who are against housing affordability.

There is nothing progressive about literally stopping progress on housing affordability.

The actual labor costs for the workers are not the issue, they already don't make a lot and wages have stagnated for decades while costs have soared. Also, there's plenty of non-union areas that STILL have incredible costs.

Profiteering from subcontractors and suppliers is the issue. All of these bids are public, this isn't exactly forbidden knowledge.

The GOP is against density from a political perspective though, not an ideological one.

You can't have affordable housing and also oppose density, not without also being for continual environmental destruction that suburban sprawl requires. This article has so many "well meaning" but delusional people who literally the symptom of the problem. It's time these people were overruled, for the public good and for the planet.

As long as most of America remains car dependent and pedestrian-hostile, parents will be afraid of letting their kids out of the house. Unfortunately, that's rarely acknowledged as the problem (even in this article)

This seems like a false comparison

There's quite a bit of difference between the government banning free expression and a private company deciding that they don't want intolerable people on their platform — which itself is an example of their free expression.