7 ms·

European here. I can't even put to words my embafflement upon having learnt that you US folks need two staircases.

• cal5k 3y ago
  How do you think we feel about cookie notices?
  • oblio 3y ago
    Yes, housing and web cookies, equally important for one's life.
  • andix 3y ago
    There is one solution for the cookie notices that is very seldomly talked about: just don't use any marketing cookies, then you don't need consent from the user :)
  • speeder 3y ago
    Another European here: I think the law is fine. How companies, specially US companies react to it, that is not. 1. A ton of Health related websites in US refuse to work in Europe, because they are NOT willing to let you visit without sensitive data being grabbed with cookies. I truly do not understand how US people are ok with this. 2. The law says that you can't make hard to refuse cookies, yet many US-based sites I visit have shady, shady practices, for example many you have to click a button to see all the sliders for individual cookies, and when you click that button, it switches the orders of the buttons, so that the button you just clicked become "accept all", and the previous "accept all" button becomes "save current settings". Thus if you double click/tap by accident you accept all. 3. The sites that most often piss me off with shady cookie banner that tries its hardest to force you to opt-in to tracking, are ones that use a company called "Admiral", that according to LinkedIn is from Florida. https://www.linkedin.com/company/getadmiral/ https://www.linkedin.com/company/getadmiral/
    • rootusrootus 3y ago
      > A ton of Health related websites in US refuse to work in Europe, because they are NOT willing to let you visit without sensitive data being grabbed with cookies. That is the less charitable interpretation. In reality a lot of sites that cater primarily to a US audience don't have the willingness or development time to try and comply with European regulations. Barring European visitors neatly solves that.
  • chris-orgmenta 3y ago
    That ain't us.... kind of. That's the websites deciding to follow the letter of the law (or a spiteful, capitalist interpretation, taking it right to the line) instead of the spirit of the law. OK, unintended consequences of legislation. But those cookie banners are not mandated, exactly. They don't need to be there. It's the companies deciding to do it that way, so they can keep gobbling data. It's like if the building companies implemented the 2nd staircase, but only so they could measure who is going up and down it. Not for saving lives. If they were opt in, or unnecessary tracking wasn't implemented in the first place, then the banners could be elegant or gone. But I do agree that the legislation (especially the ultra focus on cookies specifically) was... blinkered & short sighted.
    • crazygringo 3y ago
      No, that's entirely Europe. The outcome of the legislation was easy for anyone to see. As you say, it was blinkered and short-sighted. And I still have to click 20 popups away on mobile every day. If only a few websites had the banner, then maybe I'd blame those websites. But when they virtually all do, I blame the law.
      • drcongo 3y ago
        Just out of interest, you prefer to have your data harvested and sold?
        • AnimalMuppet 3y ago
          How about: Don't harvest and sell my data, and don't show me a bunch of popups about exactly what data you can collect on me?
          • drcongo 3y ago
            That is of course the ideal, but what, you're just gonna trust them?
            • 3y ago
  • mandibles 3y ago
    The year is 3157. Each time you access a new resource on the shared data substrate, you are required to accept something called a "Cookie." You have no idea what they are or why. Your crewmates say it has something to do with the homeworld, but you just shrug and prepare for the hyperspace jump.
• nadermx 3y ago
  The US has some very interesting requirements when building. In some cities, regardless of destiny, new buildings are required to have 1.x parking spots per unit or something of the sort as well. Which basically assures all buildings have to be designed for car centric life.
  • andix 3y ago
    It's the same for many European cities and towns. Many cities started to reduce it down to 0.5 parking spaces per flat or less, because many of those parking spaces tend to be empty in bigger cities. And just increase prices for housing.
    • ghaff 3y ago
      I was just visiting a European friend for a couple weeks. They have a car but parking was a sufficient drama that they took the Uber equivalent within the city most of the time. Busses but minimal metro.
      • andix 3y ago
        I honestly don't see the drama in most European cities, it's not like in NYC. Street parking is very limited in bigger cities, so you might need to park in expensive parking garages. Or use other methods of travel. Only in areas with a lot of old houses (built before cars were a thing) there might be a lack of garages. Owning/driving a car is generally very expensive in many European countries. Not like in the US where wages are rather high, but cars and gas extremely cheap, because there is no substantial tax on them. Edit: this might not apply to southern Europe. In some southern European cities it's impossible to go by car. That's why everyone drives a scooter.
        • ghaff 3y ago
          This was southern Europe. Looked like mostly street/sidewalk parking as far as I could tell. Certainly lots of cars--not a lot of scooters.
  • 3y ago
• mzs 3y ago
  Most housing was wood framed and there was tragedy after tragedy from inescapable fires.
• screye 3y ago
  Oddly, this is already a solved problem. NYC fire escapes are world famous. If every sub-10 floor building can have a 2nd window fire escape.... then you can have your cake and eat it too.
  • crazygringo 3y ago
    NYC stopped building fire escapes a long time ago. There are still tons of them, but all on older buildings. It certainly would be interesting to see them make a comeback though.
• kazinator 3y ago
  Embafflement? Oh US buildings have that too: fire-proof doors divide those long hallways that connect the staircases.
• quickthrowman 3y ago
  American here. I can't even put to words my embafflement upon learning that 72 people died in the Grenfell Tower fire in Europe in 2017.
  • estebank 3y ago
    Fire deaths per 100k in 2019: US .82 UK .38 https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/fire-death-rates https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/fire-death-rates
    • anthonypasq 3y ago
      you understand that 1/3 of the country lights on fire annually?
  • adrian_b 3y ago
    That had little to do with stairs, but it was caused by the use of inappropriate combustible materials, which were forbidden for buildings of that height in many countries of continental Europe, but they were allowed in Great Britain were regulations were much more lax. So that event is strictly specific to UK and not representative for Europe in general.
    • drcongo 3y ago
      We (UK) had banned those materials too until the tories decided to unban them because many of them are also property developers.
    • deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    • Symbiote 3y ago
      The materials were also forbidden in the UK, but the enforcement of the regulations was very poor. (The materials are produced for use on 1-2 storey buildings, which is fine.)
  • throwbadubadu 3y ago
• rconti 3y ago
  Yes, our insanely burdensome health and safety regulations in the US often baffle the devil-may-care freewheeling folks over in Europe. /s
• nineplay 3y ago
  I'm often surprised when posters identify themselves as "European" which encompasses such a broad range of cultures, biotypes, and ecosystems that it makes any comparison of the US way vs the European way virtually impossible. That said, when looking at the reasons for fire safety in the U.S., there are many factors to consider which may or may not apply in parts of Europe -- Frequency of wildfires. They are not uncommon in my southwest corner, so fire safety is taken very seriously -- Proximity of emergency services. It can't be assumed that the local fire department is a few minutes drive away -- Building materials. Materials that are fire-proof are rarely earthquake proof. Any of these may or may not apply in any particular case but "embafflement" seems pretty extreme.
  • cycomanic 3y ago
    > I'm often surprised when posters identify themselves as "European" which encompasses such a broad range of cultures, biotypes, and ecosystems that it makes any comparison of the US way vs the European way virtually impossible. Many people in Europe do indeed identify as European. This has become more and more prevalent as people increasingly move around in Europe. I'd also argue that you are ignoring the cultural differences in the US (e.g. New Jersey vs Utah) something which I find Europeans are often guilty of. > That said, when looking at the reasons for fire safety in the U.S., there are many factors to consider which may or may not apply in parts of Europe > -- Frequency of wildfires. They are not uncommon in my southwest corner, so fire safety is taken very seriously We are talking about multi (>4) story, multi family apartment buildings, how are wildfires relevant? > -- Proximity of emergency services. It can't be assumed that the local fire department is a few minutes drive away Again we are not talking about requirements for some cottage in the woods, these are city buildings. The whole argument is for buildings where you have space constraints. > -- Building materials. Materials that are fire-proof are rarely earthquake proof. Again I don't see the relevance, we are talking about a national building code, but only a tiny fraction of US cities are earthquake zones. The article also asserts that most Asian countries (which presumably includes Japan) have only one stairwell requirements. > Any of these may or may not apply in any particular case but "embafflement" seems pretty extreme. I actually agree if one needs to grasp for straws like these for reasons for the 2 stairwell rule, it is pretty baffling. The article actually nicely described the history and why it's outdated.
• carabiner 3y ago
  > I can't even put to words my embafflement That's because the word is "bafflement."
• crazygringo 3y ago
  Why would you choose to write something here with a snarky attitude like that? There's a reasoned discussion to be had around fire safety regulations, but when you instantly make it about cultures and don't even try to understand, you're not being part of the solution -- you're part of the problem.
  • baq 3y ago
    Maybe I should say I’m from abroad instead? European seems to trigger something in some folks around here. That aside, I fail to see any cultural or other reason to require twin staircases nowadays other than ‘that’s how we always did it here’. I admit it openly and state that I’m from somewhere where we don’t do that, and the world works just as well, except buildings have a higher useful to total area ratio.
    • rootusrootus 3y ago
      > European seems to trigger something in some folks around here. Nothing personal against you, but we see a fair number of self-described Europeans that are a lovely combination of naive, ignorant, and arrogant. It isn't fair to stereotype, but it takes ongoing effort not to.
    • crazygringo 3y ago
      > That aside, I fail to see any cultural or other reason But are you an expert in it? Have you researched it? Are you sure the world would "work just as well" if the safety requirements were removed in the US? Considering things like different building materials, different rates of wildfires near urban areas, etc.? Maybe instead of declaring yourself baffled as if it's obviously something dumb or backwards because it's not how you do it in Europe (or another place), you should ask why it's different instead, and see if you can learn rather than judge. Then it wouldn't come across as condescending.
• drcongo 3y ago
  I'm baffled at the phrase "single stair" when what they actually mean is "single staircase". I had to read most of that article to work out what it actually meant, while at the same time imagining buildings with only one stair.
• bombcar 3y ago
  Us Americans are very wide. The second staircase is for the oversized pickup truck. (And anyway the dual staircase thing isn’t even universal in the US).
• Pxtl 3y ago
  It's even worse in Canada. You need a 2nd staircase for a multi-unit home that's over 2 storeys. If it weren't for the "multi-unit" part, there would be a lot of houses that would need to be built with a 2nd stair.
  • Vecr 3y ago
    Second staircases are pretty good. I think most people should have them if they can afford them.