3 ms·

>If we approach unfamiliar ideas curiously, we can imagine part of factual reality that is outside our conceptions: people know things we don't and have legitim

>If we approach unfamiliar ideas curiously, we can imagine part of factual reality that is outside our conceptions: people know things we don't and have legitimate motives we haven't considered. I know almost nothing about outdoor dining; it would be interesting to hear from a restauranteur and city planner. He has a point though: treating every idea 'curiously' will kill an endevour by a thousand cuts.[0] To the point, attempting to apply these standards retrospectively would result in a very different and much worse current day. For starters most of San Francisco would still be part of the bay. I can't even imagine the horror and outrage at proposing to fill in the bay to increase the footprint of downtown? And yet considering we aren't chomping at the bit to return SF to nature I can't help feel society has decided it was the right thing to do. [0]How does outdoor dining affect the patterns of migratory birds? Better fund a study. For each restaurant, so the individual facts. Are you a 'bird advocate' who thinks the aforementioned study was a sham? Sharpen your legal pencils because the state is very interested to hear and debate your case. I really wish this sort of thing was hyperbole.

wolverine876 5y ago
> He has a point though: treating every idea 'curiously' will kill an endevour by a thousand cuts. That is a strawperson, and not related to curiosity. Curiosity is what I described above (at least by my definition). I don't see what that has to do with your examples. > To the point, attempting to apply these standards retrospectively would result in a very different and much worse current day. For starters most of San Francisco would still be part of the bay. What standards are we applying retrospectively? Outdoor dining rules would cause SF to remain part of the bay? > [0]How does outdoor dining affect the patterns of migratory birds? Better fund a study. For each restaurant, so the individual facts. Are you a 'bird advocate' who thinks the aforementioned study was a sham? Sharpen your legal pencils because the state is very interested to hear and debate your case. / I really wish this sort of thing was hyperbole. Can you provide actual evidence of it happening in reality?
- thereisnospork 5y ago
  'Curiosity' is so often a dog whistle for BANANA. Apologies if you didn't intend it that way. But so often the 'lets explore the possibility of this' and 'lets study that' questions are weaponized -- There's always a reasonable sounding additional thing. That it takes months, and that there are even serious discussions and hand-wringing over something so simple as putting a few tables outside is itself absurd[0]. Heck, if the pandemic hadn't happened, would we even be able to have this conversation about possibly putting tables on sidewalks in SF(like is done in much of the civilized world)? or would there be too many things to be 'curious' about to (s) chance such a drastic social upheaval.(/s) The hypocrisy[1] of the current status quo is that we live in the benefit of decisions made in a far more carefree manner that would never pass muster today (e.g. filling in the SF bay.) >https://missionlocal.org/2018/06/the-strange-and-terrible-saga-of-san-franciscos-historic-laundromat-represents-the-worst-of-planning-and-development-in-this-town/ https://missionlocal.org/2018/06/the-strange-and-terrible-sa... [0]The endemic absurdity which makes it expensive to build, and by extension live in CA and the Bay Area. [1]Never mind anti-pragmatism. Landromat -> apartment, except it casts shadows on a school playground after school hours. >https://sfplanning.org/standards-bird-safe-buildings https://sfplanning.org/standards-bird-safe-buildings 'bird-safe building requirements >http://www2.oaklandnet.com/oakca1/groups/ceda/documents/webcontent/oak035749.pdf http://www2.oaklandnet.com/oakca1/groups/ceda/documents/webc... Some permitting requirements including treatment for migratory birds. I expect you can find some news of delays over lawsuits from environmental groups over things easily

wolverine876 5y ago

> He has a point though: treating every idea 'curiously' will kill an endevour by a thousand cuts. That is a strawperson, and not related to curiosity. Curiosity is what I described above (at least by my definition). I don't see what that has to do with your examples. > To the point, attempting to apply these standards retrospectively would result in a very different and much worse current day. For starters most of San Francisco would still be part of the bay. What standards are we applying retrospectively? Outdoor dining rules would cause SF to remain part of the bay? > [0]How does outdoor dining affect the patterns of migratory birds? Better fund a study. For each restaurant, so the individual facts. Are you a 'bird advocate' who thinks the aforementioned study was a sham? Sharpen your legal pencils because the state is very interested to hear and debate your case. / I really wish this sort of thing was hyperbole. Can you provide actual evidence of it happening in reality?

thereisnospork 5y ago
'Curiosity' is so often a dog whistle for BANANA. Apologies if you didn't intend it that way. But so often the 'lets explore the possibility of this' and 'lets study that' questions are weaponized -- There's always a reasonable sounding additional thing. That it takes months, and that there are even serious discussions and hand-wringing over something so simple as putting a few tables outside is itself absurd[0]. Heck, if the pandemic hadn't happened, would we even be able to have this conversation about possibly putting tables on sidewalks in SF(like is done in much of the civilized world)? or would there be too many things to be 'curious' about to (s) chance such a drastic social upheaval.(/s) The hypocrisy[1] of the current status quo is that we live in the benefit of decisions made in a far more carefree manner that would never pass muster today (e.g. filling in the SF bay.) >https://missionlocal.org/2018/06/the-strange-and-terrible-saga-of-san-franciscos-historic-laundromat-represents-the-worst-of-planning-and-development-in-this-town/ https://missionlocal.org/2018/06/the-strange-and-terrible-sa... [0]The endemic absurdity which makes it expensive to build, and by extension live in CA and the Bay Area. [1]Never mind anti-pragmatism. Landromat -> apartment, except it casts shadows on a school playground after school hours. >https://sfplanning.org/standards-bird-safe-buildings https://sfplanning.org/standards-bird-safe-buildings 'bird-safe building requirements >http://www2.oaklandnet.com/oakca1/groups/ceda/documents/webcontent/oak035749.pdf http://www2.oaklandnet.com/oakca1/groups/ceda/documents/webc... Some permitting requirements including treatment for migratory birds. I expect you can find some news of delays over lawsuits from environmental groups over things easily