estearum

9 ms·

151.
by estearum 2mo ago
> Cool, you're demonstrating that you have no understanding of the issue. How so? You're talking about trips within New York City (Brooklyn, Queens, and Staten Island are part of New York City) or out of New York City. Thes
152.
by estearum 2mo ago
You're saying the same thing that I'm saying. Subsidized roads creates an arbitrage that allows people to live away from their jobs. This concentrates commercial activity, i.e. it creates commercial-only zones and residential-on
153.
by estearum 2mo ago
I certainly did not declare that as a goal, lol. I said that you'll know you have eliminated the arbitrage when people no longer do the arbitrage. This is a simple description of reality and not a normative claim. First, in most cities
154.
by estearum 2mo ago
You're mixing two distinct relief systems. The standard low-income relief program does not entail any tax credits or fronting any money. It does not require a disability assessment. It's just a discount attached to your EZPass and
155.
by estearum 2mo ago
In another comment thread I was talking about New York City in particular. This comment thread is talking about the general dynamics of commutes. Unlimited free or near-free road consumption is the norm across the entire US. NYC in particul
156.
by estearum 2mo ago
That is quite literally arbitrage. People with families aren't often willing to accept the living conditions they'd need to in order to live in NYC while paying market prices. So they arb and get suburban living conditions with ur
157.
by estearum 2mo ago
I don't care about the revenue or what it's spent on. I care that people internalize the costs of their own decisions. River crossings into NYC were already not free. Not sure what you're referring to. Speed cameras and stop
158.
by estearum 2mo ago
No. People should not expect to free-ride on an adjacent city's economy while inflicting severe negative externalities on the local community and its infrastructure. The entire point of the policy is to reduce the number of people dr
159.
by estearum 2mo ago
No, quite the contrary. Unlimited free road consumption has created the conditions under which jobs get super-concentrated into commercial centers and away from communities, which centralizes land values and urban vitality into the few neig
160.
by estearum 2mo ago
Even if we took the money and lit it on fire each year, congestion pricing would still be a very, very good policy.
161.
by estearum 2mo ago
While the number of options for receiving relief can be large/varied/complex, each individual program is definitely not complex. Low-income: Show your tax return <$50k/yr or show your enrollment in a public assistance pr
162.
by estearum 2mo ago
Empirically demonstrated by their continued decision to live outside of the city and commute into it, they believe they are getting more value than they are paying in via whatever tax scheme the locale has in place. You'll know they&#x
163.
by estearum 2mo ago
Well I don't care how the money flows and neither should anyone else. It's a matter of allocating costs as closely to the origin of those costs as possible. If you do that, it will turn out that buses (etc) are far superior method
164.
by estearum 2mo ago
Sure! Get a job in your own community or if you want access to the city's jobs, then pay to reduce the negative externalities of your access, or pick a transit method with fewer negative externalities.
165.
by estearum 2mo ago
The fixed income case is absolutely trivial to solve by just giving them a stipend or discount card, which is obviously what they do in NYC. The people who drive into a city to work should either pay for access to the city's economy an
166.
by estearum 2mo ago
Given the increased road availability, we should invent trains that drive on roads.
167.
by estearum 2mo ago
"Asking for money?" Who are you referring to?
168.
by estearum 2mo ago
Congestion pricing is one of the few policy ideas that's so overwhelmingly positive that even the people who try to argue against it end up strengthening the argument. Love it. "What about all the people who need to drive into the
169.
by estearum 2mo ago
Mega copium. All Trump needs is a little dangling of glory and publicity and he'd oink like a pig if he thought it'd earn it. Pathetic creature. Netanyahu tried the same schtick he's done for 30 years of POTUS's, just no
170.
by estearum 2mo ago
I agree on the 100% airgap idea, and I agree there are varying levels of care that can and should be deployed against a problem. The point I'm making (and it's a point that shows up in every air catastrophe investigation) is that
171.
by estearum 2mo ago
Oh, yeah. But alas.
172.
by estearum 2mo ago
I'm just not that concerned about them and, even if I were, I don't see what the other option is. People must be held accountable for their crimes and if they're willing to die in an effort to avoid that, then so be it, they
173.
by estearum 2mo ago
I think it's a super good question! I don't think the following description of the whole event as "a hype generator" is correct or, as described above, resulting from a coherent worldview.
174.
by estearum 2mo ago
It being someone's specialty does not mean 1) they're effective and certainly not 2) they'd be effective against this particular adversary. How many organizations on earth do you think have been attacked by 700+ coordinated
175.
by estearum 2mo ago
You disagree with the statement "there were always obvious fixes that could've prevented it" with the response "no no, these were very obvious fixes that could've prevented it?" You're missing the point
176.
by estearum 2mo ago
And? What else could they possibly do? Just make the super LLM first, but only ever use it for monitoring lesser LLMs? How will you have monitored the creation of the super LLM?
177.
by estearum 2mo ago
You are downplaying the severity of the attack Everyone I've ever seen trying to downplay the severity of the attack is extremely bullish on AI (so their downplaying is presumably motivated reasoning driven by fear of regulation/d
178.
by estearum 2mo ago
This would be a legitimately big problem if lawnmowers became continuously more and more valuable the more securely you ratchet-strapped their accelerators down, wouldn't it?
179.
by estearum 2mo ago
This is the case with all complex system failures. There were always obvious fixes that could’ve prevented it. Problem is that there are an infinite number of obvious fixes to make at any time to any system, and the reason we don’t is becau
180.
by estearum 2mo ago
Uhhh… how would literally any finite number of humans actually read and comprehend the log outputs of even a single agent, never mind hundreds or thousands of them interacting with each other over weeks across disparate systems? Especiall

More ›