Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Can you see three trees?

not-ship.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 155 posts

Re: Can you see three trees?

#51

Post by jamiecurle »

graemep wrote: post #40
jamiecurle wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For sure, it was one of things that got me about Orkney. Mind you, wars and sheep did have a pretty devastating effect on the Caledonian woodland cover of the highlands. The current population of the red deer aren't helping with natural regeneration. This is one of the reasons for the case for re-introducing predator species. But that's a complex topic with no simple answers and easy divisions.

There is already a predator species that eats red deer. Just up our venison consumption!

Yes! keep up the good work :)

Re: Can you see three trees?

#52

Post by mcdonje »

I read Don Quixote and thought it might be fun to visit some parts of Spain mentioned in the books. Then after looking at some maps and seeing a stark lack of trees, I decided I wouldn't enjoy the trip.

Re: Can you see three trees?

#54

Post by bob1029 »

I like to use wildlife as a proxy for the quality of a location. If you can see things like rabbits and squirrels on a regular basis, you are probably doing reasonably ok. I have to put up fences and other barriers or the deer will eat everything in my yard.

I've seen suburban development that would easily satisfy the three tree test from any window on any property, but they still come off as desolate wastes. The age of the trees seems to be a non trivial factor.

Re: Can you see three trees?

#56

Post by radu_floricica »

luuundonjk wrote: post #7

I was walking in central London and something felt wrong. I couldn't quite tell what though, but I had this constant feeling of unease. It took me a few days to understand - there are no trees in central London (the City). Sure, you have a small/big park here and there, but no random trees on side walks. It's literally a (beautiful) concrete/glass wasteland. Note: I only walked a few of the main streets, I'm sure I'm…

On the other hand, when I visit Venice - which is as tight a city as can be, small streets with stone in every direction except the sky - they somehow manage to drop trees in stone squares.

Same shock, different direction, much nicer.

Re: Can you see three trees?

#57

Post by riffraff »

bob1029 wrote: post #54

I like to use wildlife as a proxy for the quality of a location. If you can see things like rabbits and squirrels on a regular basis, you are probably doing reasonably ok. I have to put up fences and other barriers or the deer will eat everything in my yard. I've seen suburban development that would easily satisfy the three tree test from any window on any property, but they still come off as desolate wastes. The age…

@steerpike on HN coined the "time to sheep" metric, a measure of how long you have to travel before you're surrounded by sheep[0], which correlates reasonably well with quality of living.

Alas, doesn't work very well outside of britain, but it's a good metric :)

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42802744

Re: Can you see three trees?

#58

Post by jamiecurle »

TimByte wrote: post #46
jamiecurle wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what parts of London you were in, but there's many trees in London on sidewalks. There's even a specific species for it - the London plane (Platanus × hispanica) If you're in the very new, constantly rebuilt, concrete jungle that is the very small part of the city, then OK, greenery is going to be hard to spot. Particularly as they tend to nearly always choose the wrong species to plant and aftercare is…

I don't think the point is that London literally lacks pavement trees. As you say, the London plane is almost part of the city's visual identity in many areas. The interesting thing to me is how uneven the experience can be

Totally, "the city" (EC1/2/3/4) as the GP says is pretty barren, especially the newer built areas.

My guess would be that the bio-diversity net gain calculations put the ecological investment off-site where it was more practical.

It's a shame though as trees and architecture can happily co-exist with each other. Living walls and well kept green areas are entirely possible.

Re: Can you see three trees?

#59

Post by jurgenburgen »

helloplanets wrote: post #2

Esbo / Espoo is an odd one out, of those four. The three others look like the olden European cities you'd expect, but you'll have a hard time getting around in Espoo without a car. There are plenty of beautiful neighborhoods in Espoo, but it's basically a large spread of separate suburbs rather than a city in the way the rest are. The actual "Espoo Center" is not very green and flowery either, and it's not really tho…

On the other hand it does have a massive central park in the middle which has all kinds of animals, including deer.

I agree that the public transport is not particularly great if you don’t live on the metro or train line. It’s usually faster to drive and even with one person cheaper even when paying for gasoline and parking. Public transport is ridiculously overpriced in Finland.

Even Helsinki leaves much to be desired on that front, the coverage is okay but the ticket prices are ridiculous. It’s not feasible to drive in the center though, takes forever to get anywhere.

Post reply on HN