281–290 of 395 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unrelated, but what's the goal of obfuscating obviously known "bad" words ?
Some do it because others are offended if they see them in full print. Others do it because in many places you wont pass moderation without it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are over 30 US cities with trains to the airport. Another half dozen on the way. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_airport_rail_link_syst... US also has almost 350 miles of high speed rail, not 0. The Northeast is where it’s all concentrated with Acela being the fastest. If you live in a major city in the States it’s often way easier and faster to take rail. In Seattle for instance you can beat a driver to…
> US also has almost 350 miles of high speed rail, not 0 Given the size of the US, 350 reads as very close to 0. > Lastly NYC is one of the most serviced by transit areas in the world? Are you living in an alternate universe? Perhaps the one where e.g. underground transit is an ill-maintained, dirty, and often dangerous experience.
A funny way to interpret this would be "a mile of high speed rail per every million people"!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Out of all the tech problems to solve, driverless cars or driverless taxis has always baffled me. It’s a very complex thing to solve with a zillion edge cases. And for what net gain? What incredible inconvenience are we trying to solve? Lack of good public transit? Let’s solve that instead. Millions of cars driverless or not are not a great solution to anything.
Do we have to have this conversation in every single thread that mentions driverless cars? We get it, an extremely vocal subset of reddit/HN who lives` in downtown cities likes public transit more than cars.
As far as I see, this isn't solving a problem as much as it is getting in at the ground floor on a technology that will take even more autonomy away from people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are over 30 US cities with trains to the airport. Another half dozen on the way. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_airport_rail_link_syst... US also has almost 350 miles of high speed rail, not 0. The Northeast is where it’s all concentrated with Acela being the fastest. If you live in a major city in the States it’s often way easier and faster to take rail. In Seattle for instance you can beat a driver to…
In Seattle, you can beat a driver to the airport using the train…unless you live in Ballard, or any other place not on the I5 corridor. I never bothered with taking the train to the Beijing airport either, even though it existed for much of time there. Taxi was still more convenient. If we are talking Tokyo or Paris, ok, no problem, but it doesn’t make sense in a lot of cities for a lot of connections to be made.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are over 30 US cities with trains to the airport. Another half dozen on the way. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_airport_rail_link_syst... US also has almost 350 miles of high speed rail, not 0. The Northeast is where it’s all concentrated with Acela being the fastest. If you live in a major city in the States it’s often way easier and faster to take rail. In Seattle for instance you can beat a driver to…
"Mass transit is the solution." I spent most of my 45 years of age in public transport, I only had a car for a year and a half (and a total lemon, I don't miss that). Yet I say: beware of people who speak of THE solution . For mass transit to work, population density matters. At least in the EU, there is a trend of people being priced out of capital cities to the surrounding countryside, where the population density…
And quiet. The biggest problem is noise pollution causing problems. I want to watch my TV or listen to music at an enjoyable level while also not disturbing my neighbors. The problem with the US is the incentives are not aligned to make sound proofing a requirement, making for bad living conditions and bad neighbors.
“We’ve decided to do shutdown after we were ordered to because our product killed some people”
Cruise's death knell was when they were bought by GM. There's something insidious about US Detroit-based car companies that keeps them from innovating almost as a rule. It seems they often deliberately prioritize making their cars worse if it can drive up profit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Out of all the tech problems to solve, driverless cars or driverless taxis has always baffled me. It’s a very complex thing to solve with a zillion edge cases. And for what net gain? What incredible inconvenience are we trying to solve? Lack of good public transit? Let’s solve that instead. Millions of cars driverless or not are not a great solution to anything.
“What incredible inconvenience are we trying to solve?” 40,000 deaths in the United States every year. Hundreds of thousands of costly accidents We can’t get great transportation even in the New York City area. We have 0 miles of high-speed rail, while China built 25,000 it’s great that you want to start building some mass transit, but it’ll take a century if we start now. Let’s start by having trains take you to the…
More people living contributes to a greater labor pool, which reduces wages. It leaves a greater demand on housing, increasing costs and making so many peoples’ lives more difficult.
If you’re working class, an extra 40k deaths/year is making the world better for you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The censored swear communicates a big screw up, without taking off the professionalism hat. The effect of the swear is doubled in a professional environment, when delivered the right way.
I think that was his point; it doesn't, and instead implies that the writer is hypocritical ("I'm going to swear, but I won't actually swear").
There's no stakes here (the internet) for it to matter if you swear or not.
Your attitude on the internet won't result in any meaningful feedback, by default.
Someone has to be watching from a more strict environment for it to matter what you say on the internet. It needs to affect your job, or your wife needs to read your posts, or a moderator needs to clamp down on you.
The community accepts swearing by default.
Soo people who are in professional environments are going to bring their communication norms with them when they post online.
An I over -explaining an answer to a rhetorical 'why?' question. I think I am.
I can never tell online, if people are literally asking a question that requires explaining OR it is simply a rhetorical question.
Oh well. c'est la vie.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not everyone who prefers more personal space has psychological problems. Why is it so difficult for you to understand? Nuance matters. I commute by train, I enjoy being around people, but I use car when I want to get around on my own time, even if train is available.
Commuting to work by train but driving around otherwise is very common, but it's usually because train lines are oriented about CBD trips, but less so for cross-suburb trips. Are you saying you'd use a car for non-work trips even when the train would be more convenient?