3 ms·

Gee, fuck all these other cities that are all obviously shitholes? I guess?

eyelidlessness 5y ago
I’m gonna laugh my way into the new year with downvotes because I dared to think my city is also pleasant to live in and say so.
- mdp2021 5y ago
  You seem to (inexplicably) entail from «Tokyo [is a] big city that is also pleasant to live in» a number of assumed ideas and unduly conclusions. TFA: > [...] Tokyo is now the world’s largest city, with 37m residents in the metropolitan area and 14m in the city proper. It is also one of the world’s most liveable, with punctual public transport, safe neighbourhoods, clean streets and more restaurants and Michelin stars than any other. In the liveability index of the Economist Intelligence Unit, our sister group, Tokyo comes joint fourth, but its population is larger than the combined populations of the others (Adelaide, Auckland, Osaka and Wellington). “It’s possible to have a liveable city at any scale - Tokyo proves that,” says Gabriel Metcalf, at Committee for Sydney, an Australian think-tank. // It offers lessons to developing cities elsewhere. In 1950, 30% of the world’s population was urban; by 2050, 68% will be [...]
  - eyelidlessness 5y ago
    The title is The big city that is also pleasant to live in, which seems to pretty clearly imply that others are not. The title on HN last night was Tokio: the big city that is also pleasant to live in, which seems like a moderately reasonable edit by OP, but certainly emphasized my perception of that implication. The title has since been edited to be less accurate but, hey yeah, maybe more representative of the article’s content. There is a lot of anti-urban content out there and I’m fairly used to people who don’t live in mine maligning it anyhow. So yeah, I saw the title and took it to be that with a twist. And I read far too much of that already so I didn’t read further.

I’m gonna laugh my way into the new year with downvotes because I dared to think my city is also pleasant to live in and say so.

mdp2021 5y ago
You seem to (inexplicably) entail from «Tokyo [is a] big city that is also pleasant to live in» a number of assumed ideas and unduly conclusions. TFA: > [...] Tokyo is now the world’s largest city, with 37m residents in the metropolitan area and 14m in the city proper. It is also one of the world’s most liveable, with punctual public transport, safe neighbourhoods, clean streets and more restaurants and Michelin stars than any other. In the liveability index of the Economist Intelligence Unit, our sister group, Tokyo comes joint fourth, but its population is larger than the combined populations of the others (Adelaide, Auckland, Osaka and Wellington). “It’s possible to have a liveable city at any scale - Tokyo proves that,” says Gabriel Metcalf, at Committee for Sydney, an Australian think-tank. // It offers lessons to developing cities elsewhere. In 1950, 30% of the world’s population was urban; by 2050, 68% will be [...]
- eyelidlessness 5y ago
  The title is The big city that is also pleasant to live in, which seems to pretty clearly imply that others are not. The title on HN last night was Tokio: the big city that is also pleasant to live in, which seems like a moderately reasonable edit by OP, but certainly emphasized my perception of that implication. The title has since been edited to be less accurate but, hey yeah, maybe more representative of the article’s content. There is a lot of anti-urban content out there and I’m fairly used to people who don’t live in mine maligning it anyhow. So yeah, I saw the title and took it to be that with a twist. And I read far too much of that already so I didn’t read further.