Bike

That’s a good point to illustrate the importance of banning cars for personal transportation; all of the traffic is making your partner’s job slower and more stressful

Places without off-street parking mandates still usually have on-street and even off-street parking

I see, my favorite podcast (“A History of Rock Music in 500 Songs”)[https://500songs.com/] has no ads. I’d strongly recommend if your interested in that kind of music

I don’t understand what you mean. I just skip the ads with my skip 30 seconds button.

If you’re doing it over an app, without the chance for the person you’re dumping to respond, I see no risk of things turning nasty

I’m not an expert, but have used a real time kernel for scientific research, using rtxi. My understanding is that the real time threads allows the computations to occur in a deterministic amount of time. This is necessary if you want to quickly respond to changes in personal membrane voltage with injections of current, and don’t want it to sometimes take longer to calculate how much current to inject.

In the US you sometimes hear that phones in class are necessary to see if your kids are OK in a school shooting scenario.

I think this isn’t a good argument, since school shootings are rare, and it’s unclear if each student having a phone would do more harm than good in that kind of situation.

I don’t see the connection between neurodivergence and phones

Bikes are cheaper than cars

Short haul flights should probably be high speed train rides anyway

I don’t think it hurts the economy since moving people to producive areas increases productiviy.

It does hurt homeowners, who have managed to capture the regulatory regime by pressuring their city government into passing and maintaining zoning laws.

My issue with degrowth is that it’s incompatible with capitalist society. Capitalism only works if the economy is growing. If the economy is stagnant, a win for your neighbor is a loss for you. It would be difficult to build a community under these conditions.

I know I’m on .ml and capitalism has a bad name around here. But I think is clear that markets can improve peoples lives, and alternatives are difficult to implement.

Turning fuckcars into an anticapitalist movement is unnecessary and unhelpful in my opinion. I just want to be able to bike around my city safely.

I’m not sure planting forests instead of housing is always a win for the environment. If the land is in a place where people can take sustainable transportation to their jobs, you should put dense housing there. Or else people will have to drive around your suburban forest.

But in the Brain May case, I have no clue where the forest is

I don’t see what’s wrong with quoting the introduction. Generaly, literature reviews are more reliable than a single study, and the introduction is a mini literature review.

I guess if op was writing a scientific paper, they ought to cite the original research to give credit to the right people. And maybe it would be better to cite a proper review article in a Lemmy post, but I think what op did was fine.

Theres an interesting argument by Chuck Mahron against speed cameras: https://podcast.strongtowns.org/e/the-arguments-for-speed-cameras…and-why-they-don-t-hold-up/

The core of his argument is that it’s bad to punish normal behavior, instead you should just do traffic calming, even cheap traffic calming

It seems that this problem, as well as some other problems, would be solved if we stoped giving dead people influence over property.

I don’t think people’s property rights 100 years ago should influence who gets what water today.

That was a good episode. Environmentalist ought to fight the interstate highway system and promote passenger rail. Especially at our national parks.

I remember visiting Joshua Tree and dreading the parts of the hike where it runs parallel to the road. It would be awesome if they replaced the road with a train, or even just redesigned it for a 20 mph speed limit.

I disagree with some of your criticisms of this community:

Netherlands have a GDP greater than every US state except for 4 of them

Walkable cities are cheaper than car infrastructure. Lots of good work was done by Urban3 demonstrates this be calculating the tax income vs tax burden of city blocks. For example, here is their analysis of my city: Eugene Oregon

less land area than 41 of US state

NJB calls this “The Dumbest Excuse for Bad Cities”

the Netherlands are: unique.

I disagree. Lots of developed countries in Europe and Asia have desirable urban disign. In fact, I would argue that the USA is uniquely bad. Heres a graph from vision zero:

But for the meat and potatos:

If you like spreadsheets presented as a youtube video: you should check out citynerd. Here’s a video where he lists cities with affordable, walkable neighborhoods: 10 Walkable US Cities That Won’t Bankrupt You. Spoiler: Pittsburgh wins.

I think that parking reforms is the best way to move away from car dependency, and these are being mandated in the state of Oregon, which has also had urban growth boundaries for a long time.