Electric cars are bad for the environment since they require mineral mining and polute the city with micoplastics from tire dust. They are almost as bad as ICE cars.

Ebikes are the way to go.

I’m generally against the idea of planting as many trees as possible.

Trees are not very good carbon sinks because they decompose and burn. Also, there are also some ecological communities where adding trees makes the land a worse carbon sink.

Avoiding cutting down forests to build suburbs is something I can certainly get behind though.

Do you think anyone ought to go to prison?

If a person has harmed others, and is likely to do more harm in the future, it’s appropriate to remove them from society. This is why prisons exist.

Drivers licence suspension typically is the consequence of crimes that are too minor to warrant prison. In this case, the perpetrator has the chance to make changes to their life to avoid prison. For example, they can accept slow public transit, bike to work, get a closer job, move to a place where it’s easier to live without a car.

Obviously, It will be challenging for the perpetrator to reorganize their life in a way that does not require them to risk harming others, and many will fail.

But your argument that society is required to accept being victimized by dangerous drivers because it would be inhumane to force them to use alternative forms of transportation (used by millions of people too poor to afford a car, even in the most car dependent cities) is absurd.

In Amsterdam the mode share for all trips is like 30% for biking and for walking and like 20% for driving and for transit

They did this in California and Oregon, then the schools went to shit.

Also, property taxes are a good way to encourage density, which is necessary to fight climate change

hitting refresh in firefox reader mode works for me.

I’ve been using Rofi for a few years. I can’t think of anything to look out for, pretty much does what it says on the tin.

Snuggling – never. And this doesn’t apply only to men, it applies to women whom I don’t find attractive as well.

What about nonhuman animals? Do you dislike cuddly dogs?

Yes, so I can probably plan for it.

One problem with cars is that they kill people in crashes. Larger, higher cars are more likely to kill people.

As someone who lives in a car dependent city without a car. I prefer when my neighbors try to kill me with a small car rather than a large car.

Github

How would virtual environment software, like conda, work without $PATH?

The goal of the zig language is to allow people to write optimal software in a simple and explicit language.

It’s advantage over c is that they improved some features to make things easier to read and write. For example, arrays have a length and don’t decay to pointers, defer, no preprocessor macros, no makefile, first class testing support, first class error handling, type inference, large standard library. I have found zig far easier to learn than c, (dispite the fact that zig is still evolving and there are less learning resources than c)

It’s advantage over rust is that it’s simpler. Ive never played around with rust, but people have said that the language is more complex than zig. Here’s an article the zig people wrote about this: https://ziglang.org/learn/why_zig_rust_d_cpp/

The point of a gas tax is to have the people who use and degrade the roads pay for the repair.

We want to discourage car driving, so the tax should be related to how much you drive a car. Otherwise, you are making people using more sustainable forms of transportation subsidize driving

By nonmarket housing, i mean housing that’s either own and run by the government, owned and run by nonprofits (probably funded by the government), or owned and run by coops.

In my part of the world, public housing is a bad word, (due to bad examples caused by government disinvestment) so I try to use other words.

I’m not banning landlords I’m banning vulture funds, pension funds, agencies, conglomerates, multinationals etc. from owning homes.

I guess i missunderstood you. As far as I’ve seen, vacancies are quite low in places where housing is scarce. Investment properties are usually rented out.

would be lower, but you could buy a house and sell again in five years when you move on.

Closing costs are very high. It would be difficult to make housing cheap enough that the benifits to owning a home outweighs these costs. Also, you would need to sell the house quick, so that you don’t pay for two houses at a time. But if housing was no longer scarce, it would be hard to sell the house quick.

I cant imaging a future where it makes sense for everyone to own their own home. We should always consider renters when making public policy, even though they have little political power.

Corporations owning land is the current way many young / low income people get housing.

Renting is cheaper for people that might move in ~5 years. Moving citys is an important way to gain income.

I think baning cooperate ownership of “residential land” would be another government handout to owners at the expense of renters. Id prefer policies that increase housing supply instead. For example, investment in nonmarket housing, and permitting reform favoring infill development.

A walkable neighborhood does not mean a neighborhood where you can “go for a walk”.

It’s a neighborhood where you can use walking as a form of transportation to get the things you need. Unfortunately this is impossible when the neighborhood was designed for cars. Car centered design requires large parking lots and wide roads. This causes the places people need to go to spread out in order to make room for all the car infrastructure. This puts these places outside of walking distance.

This means de-emphasizing the car is a requirement for walkability.

What problem are you having? Ive been using the 2nd gen for years, and didn’t notice any problems, except more xruns than I think ought to happen. But it’s hard to know what to blame for xruns.