Interchange in Houston is the same size as an entire city center in Italy • Hacker News Board

Re: Interchange in Houston is the same size as an entire city center in Italy

#521

Post by cyberdrunk » Tue, Sep 01, 2020, 1:48 PM UTC

donjoe wrote: post #495

cyberdrunk wrote: post #490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many/most flats in those cute old European cities have windows directly over a street. You can have cars making noise and pollution literally within 5-10 meters of your window. This is bad for physical and mental health. Soviet-style housing planning is a good middle ground. There, most flats can enjoy silence (you only hear cars that belong to your neighbors and no passer-bys) and still the districts are planned for…

This is not a problem of houses built that way since the were built pre-car times to allow max light into apartments. The streets back then were also a social aspect of life where we met people and could interact with each other. Then came a time we handed over streets to parking spots and some folks driving at 50km/h and faster. Social aspects have been gone. We should not build our apts for cars and align to them.…

> This is not a problem of houses built that way since the were built pre-car times to allow max light into apartments

Not the case in most of Europe IMO. The apartment buildings were built along very narrow streets to either fit inside perimeter of city walls or (later) because real estate was expensive. Due to narrowness of roads, these apartments are not very well lit and are depressing (you can't see the sky through the window, only the building across the street). Here in Poland, it basically wasn't until central urban planning by communists until we had cities which are livable, car or no car. This is reflected in real estate pries, where apartments in the old, historic buildings can be cheaper (despite often being right in the city centers) than in the (much denser) soviet conglomerates.

> Then came a time we handed over streets to parking spots and some folks driving at 50km/h and faster. Social aspects have been gone.

Even cars at 30 km/h make plenty of noise (when accelerating to that speed). I'm not sure what you mean by "social aspects" of streets?

Re: Interchange in Houston is the same size as an entire city center in Italy

#522

Post by ashtonkem » Tue, Sep 01, 2020, 2:05 PM UTC

austincheney wrote: post #489

ashtonkem wrote: post #483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might disagree with it as a tactic, but I'm not sure how you got to the idea that it's designed for animosity and not influence. Can you read the minds and intentions of the protestors? How would you know?

As the delayed driver, the audience, I know absolutely how I would feel. This is the perception.

Which is completely different.

You do understand how what you perceive and what they intend are different things, right? And that jumping from "it is inconvenient for me" to "they only intend to cause me harm" is a serious leap.

Re: Interchange in Houston is the same size as an entire city center in Italy

#523

Post by CydeWeys » Tue, Sep 01, 2020, 2:16 PM UTC

refurb wrote: post #316

CydeWeys wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does "pounding sand" actually mean in this context though? Considering that the people in question are complaining because it's already happening to them? You can't just tell people to stop complaining about grievances.

People are free to complain. But the challenge is (at least in CA) is that the most minor complaints will hold up desperately needed housing projects. Legitimate complaints (e.g. this will mess up traffic) are fine. "Neighborhood feel" complaints (e.g. this building is too tall, it doesn't fit the neighborhood character) should be met with "thanks for your feedback, but that's not a good enough reason". Of course if…

Agreed with you on all points. Unfortunately housing policy decisions are made at a very local level in the United States, and local politicians are accountable to a very small number of squeaky wheels. And they can't afford to ignore even a few highly pissed-off wealthy voters. So what you end up seeing is that the wealthier, whiter people living closer in have enough political power to successfully stop new development, and then the development that does happen occurs in farther out areas that are poorer and blacker/browner and have less political say, and that's when you get gentrification. Trust me when I say that East Bushwick is not anyone's first choice for erecting new luxury apartment buildings, it's just that SoHo and its ilk have successfully been fighting all new construction for decades running.

That's why doing housing/zoning policy at a much higher level, ideally statewide, would be much better. Japan has that (for their equivalent of states) and you don't see these distortionary effects. Then you'd see the development happening where it really truly does make the most sense, and as a side effect gentrification would be lessened because not as much new construction would be happening in farther out marginal neighborhoods because the demand would be satisfied closer in. Incidentally this also has positive benefits in lower commute times and less environmental impact.

Re: Interchange in Houston is the same size as an entire city center in Italy

#524

Post by crmrc114 » Tue, Sep 01, 2020, 2:18 PM UTC

romanoderoma wrote: post #373

crmrc114 wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, next to waterways and railroads.

Not exactly https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_aqueduct https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_roads

Sure, lets talk about cities before the advent of interchangeable parts and the industrial revolution to argue for why early industry did not need rail or waterway to carry heavy logistics. Makes sense.

Re: Interchange in Houston is the same size as an entire city center in Italy

#525

Post by austincheney » Tue, Sep 01, 2020, 2:27 PM UTC

ashtonkem wrote: post #522

austincheney wrote: post #489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As the delayed driver, the audience, I know absolutely how I would feel. This is the perception.

Which is completely different. You do understand how what you perceive and what they intend are different things, right? And that jumping from "it is inconvenient for me" to "they only intend to cause me harm" is a serious leap.

> You do understand how what you perceive and what they intend are different things, right?

If the protestors are utterly incapable of bridging that gap it doesn't matter what their intentions are as they are failing to win hearts and minds. That leap you speak to is only a minor baby step. If they really wanted to convince me of the value of their message they could start by not intentionally pissing me off.

This isn't rocket science. This complete lack of common sense on behalf of the protestors typically indicates youth. Everybody else has since either developed a few drops of empathy or moved on to anything more self-indulgent.

Re: Interchange in Houston is the same size as an entire city center in Italy

#526

Post by jariel » Tue, Sep 01, 2020, 2:31 PM UTC

sudosysgen wrote: post #520

jlawson wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have a vote. Use it. You also have a voice. Use it. You have no right to undemocratically wield power over others by physical force. You have no right to force others to suffer to compel them to your will which they did not choose.

Limiting the political engagement of your citizens to only voting in a two party system is madness. When people stop being engaged, and stop voting, and your country turns to shit, I can say that I warned you. No, seriously, this is insane. You want to, functionally, ban protests. There is absolutely no way you can have a functional country if you can't even have peaceful demonstrations.

"You want to, functionally, ban protests."

You have a misunderstanding of what is legal, what is not, and what a peaceful protest is.

Blocking traffic is already banned.

That's 100% illegal in all cases.

'Protests' which infringe on the rights of others are just another form of fascism.

'My Fascism is Worthwhile' is not a civic or moral argument.

You can protest peacefully, vote, engage in other forms of civic obedience, but you can't do it at the expense of others, full stop.

As soon as someone starts trampling on your rights for a cause you don't agree with you'll scream 'victim' and then maybe have a different perspective.

Re: Interchange in Houston is the same size as an entire city center in Italy

#527

Post by LoSboccacc » Tue, Sep 01, 2020, 2:32 PM UTC

cyberdrunk wrote: post #521

donjoe wrote: post #495

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not a problem of houses built that way since the were built pre-car times to allow max light into apartments. The streets back then were also a social aspect of life where we met people and could interact with each other. Then came a time we handed over streets to parking spots and some folks driving at 50km/h and faster. Social aspects have been gone. We should not build our apts for cars and align to them.…

> This is not a problem of houses built that way since the were built pre-car times to allow max light into apartments Not the case in most of Europe IMO. The apartment buildings were built along very narrow streets to either fit inside perimeter of city walls or (later) because real estate was expensive. Due to narrowness of roads, these apartments are not very well lit and are depressing (you can't see the sky thro…

> what you mean by "social aspects" of streets?

well the '70s blocks in Poland do have quite some shared greenery, at least the southern part were I've been extensively, but I saw them also up north, even in the outskirts of 'special case' cities that have had their historical centers preserved or restored like Gdansk [1] or Torun [2] - that's what planner can do to encourages a local and social aspect to the local neighbors

but still it doesn't solve working places interconnection in a way that makes walking nor public transit satisfactory.

1 https://www.google.com/maps/place/Danzica,+Polonia/@54.34153...

2 https://www.google.com/maps/place/Toru%C5%84,+Polonia/@53.02...

Re: Interchange in Houston is the same size as an entire city center in Italy

#528

Post by jariel » Tue, Sep 01, 2020, 2:33 PM UTC

jacobkania wrote: post #472

jariel wrote: post #466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"That's a valid protest." It's valid to protest things which are not true? So we can block traffic in LA to raise awareness that 'Aliens are coming'? No - absolutely not. Your arbitrary definition of what you consider to be a 'valid protest' is not relevant. You 100% do not have the right to block highways under any circumstances. Full stop. You can of course, block highways if you use force to do it, i.e. by amassin…

I firmly believe that if you have enough people who think it’s important enough to block traffic to make a point — if their belief is that aliens are coming to destroy earth — they’re allowed to do that. Sure, it’s illegal, but they’ll do it anyways. I think it’s unlikely that so many people will come together to block traffic, but if it’s so important to them, then I’m all for it. They’ll definitely get to make thei…

I doesn't matter if you are 'all for it'.

The rest of us are 'not for it' - and that's why it's well enshrined into law.

Your pet ideology is no reason to obstruct others.

If you can convince LA County to shut down the highway for a 'march' over the 'weekend' - then that's fine.

Otherwise, fines or jail.

Re: Interchange in Houston is the same size as an entire city center in Italy

#529

Post by jariel » Tue, Sep 01, 2020, 2:35 PM UTC

ashtonkem wrote: post #481

jariel wrote: post #466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"That's a valid protest." It's valid to protest things which are not true? So we can block traffic in LA to raise awareness that 'Aliens are coming'? No - absolutely not. Your arbitrary definition of what you consider to be a 'valid protest' is not relevant. You 100% do not have the right to block highways under any circumstances. Full stop. You can of course, block highways if you use force to do it, i.e. by amassin…

> It's valid to protest things which are not true? If you set the bar at "your point has to be true before you can protest", then goodbye free speech. Because who exactly gets to decide what is true, and therefore is legitimate to protest over? The government? The media? That is an insanely dangerous power to give any institution, which is why the first amendment is purposefully interpreted to put the minimum number…

"If you set the bar at "your point has to be true before you can protest", then goodbye free speech."

This is not true at all.

These arguments are purposefully conflating 'speech and protest' with the right to block traffic and infringe on other people's rights.

You can 100% stand in front of city hall to tell us about 'Alien Invasions' if you want.

You can 100% not block traffic to do it.

You have more opportunities for expression today than at any time in history, use those 'vehicles' instead of blocking 'vehicles'.

Re: Interchange in Houston is the same size as an entire city center in Italy

#530

Post by ashtonkem » Tue, Sep 01, 2020, 2:36 PM UTC

austincheney wrote: post #525

ashtonkem wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is completely different. You do understand how what you perceive and what they intend are different things, right? And that jumping from "it is inconvenient for me" to "they only intend to cause me harm" is a serious leap.

> You do understand how what you perceive and what they intend are different things, right? If the protestors are utterly incapable of bridging that gap it doesn't matter what their intentions are as they are failing to win hearts and minds. That leap you speak to is only a minor baby step. If they really wanted to convince me of the value of their message they could start by not intentionally pissing me off. This is…

> That leap you speak to is only a minor baby step.

It absolutely is not a baby step. In fact it is a really big deal to jump from your own experience to assuming the intent of other people. That is actually a really fast way to anger people in my experience, because it requires that you pretend that you understand what is going on in another person's head. Saying "your actions caused X" is pretty straightforward, but "you intended to cause X" or "you intended to cause X and X alone" requires mind reading ability on your part.

Again, you can disagree with it as a tactic, I genuinely do not care about that. What bothers me is that you're unilaterally asserting that you personally understand the intention of the protestors, which is quite the assertion, and one that you have only backed up by "this is how I feel about it".