occz

22 ms·

301.
by occz 4y ago
That is maybe the most ridiculous comment I've ever heard when comparing cargo bikes to cars.
302.
by occz 4y ago
I don't think we disagree, and I agree that I could probably refine my advocacy a bit.
303.
by occz 4y ago
>People aren't dumb. Cars are expensive yet extremely popular. Thus, car travel is superior when it comes to satisfying the needs of the owners. Train travel is often more costly and much more inconvenient. Air travel obviously does
304.
by occz 4y ago
Paved bicycle paths require a fraction of the size and an even smaller fraction of the upkeep, on account of bicycles being so light, and road tear being an approximate function of weight to the fourth power.
305.
by occz 4y ago
That would probably be quite efficient from an energy-standpoint, but we'd need too much rails to make it work at scale. Cool as hell, though. When going to visit one of my grandparents, I usually pass by a decommissioned railroad that
306.
by occz 4y ago
>Time has great value, we only have a limitdd amoint of it and getting to spend less of it in transport and more of it spdnding time with loved ones or making art is good. Agreed. So much time gets killed by the mathematically unscalable
307.
by occz 4y ago
>You're correct in the sense that trains and bicycles are, true, more energy efficient. I'm not even looking for numbers here, because it's irrelevant. On the contrary, it's highly relevant in a world where we have a
308.
by occz 4y ago
This is true. However, car-oriented development and car travel is inferior to alternative modes of transportation in essentially all other aspects as well, so this point does not run counter to these superior modes of transportation.
309.
by occz 4y ago
>So to me it feels like those who use this as an opportunity to undermine EVs, aren't really helping. My position is a general anti-car position, with a particular disdain for ICEs. See my other comments in the thread for my thinkin
310.
by occz 4y ago
Yes indeed. The fact that conservatives broadly have taken the position supporting of cars and car-oriented development is one of the most absurd things imaginable. Socialized inefficient infrastructure that was not even a thing a hundred y
311.
by occz 4y ago
>In what way were they demolished? Cars allow for urban sprawl. People now have homes in places where they rely on cars to get to work. Highway construction demolished a lot of neighbourhoods in cities. In the U.S, the demolished neighbo
312.
by occz 4y ago
Cities were demolished to accommodate cars in the past, I see no reason why such a retrofit would be impossible in the other direction. There is some potential in reduction by moving jobs to WFH when possible, but this is not mutually exclu
313.
by occz 4y ago
Looks like trains will beat out bicycles in some cases, but they lose out to e-bikes and e-scooters. Check the table in this helpful article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_efficiency_in_transport
314.
by occz 4y ago
You can dig into the numbers on this helpful article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_efficiency_in_transport
315.
by occz 4y ago
Ok. On the other hand, a complete migration to EVs won't solve the climate crisis either, as they are not energy efficient enough. Combine this with the fact that car-oriented developments are energy-inefficient in other ways - single
316.
by occz 4y ago
And in turn, trains are far more energy efficient than all kinds of cars. Trains are subsequently beaten by both electric and non-electric bicycles, which are the most energy efficient mode of transport currently known to man. While phasing
317.
by occz 4y ago
That's probably not what they meant. What I interpreted it as was that the current iteration of machine learning will not be able to satisfactorily solve full self-driving cars.
318.
by occz 4y ago
A better choice would have been to port their RN-app on iOS to an actual native iOS-app.
319.
by occz 4y ago
Trying to use a ticketing system as a solution to the inconvenience of having to see people without homes is a particularly awful take. Solve the problem of homelessness by making homes and putting the homeless people in them, don't us
320.
by occz 4y ago
UX is merely the functional side of designing things, and the best resources to help me understand that has been: - The book The Design of Everyday Things - The podcast 99% Invisible
321.
by occz 4y ago
>majority This can't really be right though, can it? There aren't enough engineers in FAANGs to equal half of the DAUs of HN, and I kind of doubt that all of them would be on HN.
322.
by occz 4y ago
What's your reasoning behind this thought?
323.
by occz 4y ago
Wasn't Mont Blanc speculated to be caused by someone throwing a cigarette out a window which caused the fuel in a vehicle to combust? Very few of the circumstances of Mont Blanc would be true in this scenario - no combustion engine veh
324.
by occz 4y ago
SUVs should be banned, or taxed the point of economic non-viability. The fact that such a deadly category of vehicle, on top of being much less energy efficient, is being allowed to take over the market, is completely inane.
325.
by occz 4y ago
That should probably be repealed.
326.
by occz 4y ago
SUVs in general should probably either be outright banned or taxed to the point of not being competitive anymore. The immense harm they cause is just laughable, and the benefits are highly dubious.
327.
by occz 4y ago
Interesting. How is this different from a composting toilet? Those are already an available option for people with limited access to water and sewage infrastructure.
328.
by occz 4y ago
Sounds strange - I've been able to do offline lessons as recently as this week. On android with a free account. Maybe this was something temporary in the past?
329.
by occz 4y ago
>So unfortunately, unless you can come up with a better way, auditioning for your software engineering job is here to stay, just like auditioning for your acting job. So you might as well accept it. If I was able to come up with a better
330.
by occz 4y ago
Traffic calming measures, unless implemented entirely incorrectly, are not unmarked. To have them unmarked would defeat the purpose, which is to indicate that the driver of the vehicle attempting to navigate the street must slow down. It is

More ›