Basically if you need the same logic in two places instead of copying it to the second place you make it into a function and use that function in both places.

That way if you need that logic to change you only need to make that edit once regardless of whether you use it one time or one thousand times.

As a Swiss person I would like to apologize for that woman’s “English”.

Busses have their uses. Lots of commentor have mentioned the flexibility in setting up / changing routes. But there’s also the flexibility in sizes. You can start a line with a large van or small mini bus and your only overhead is the driver. From there you can scale that up according to demand up to frequently run articulated busses. Meanwhile your minimum investment for tram includes at the very least a not inexpensive track installation.

Don’t get me wrong. If you have the passenger volume that investment definitely pays off. But I don’t like this unnecessary competition between two modes of transport that can be very complimentary to each other and are both better than individual cars.

Republicans are probably fully on board with these new charges. I hear they have quite the obsession with former white house residents deleting stuff that pertains to the government from private systems…

For his post is dark and full of errors.

Uhm. GoT isn’t exactly the first to use this expression…

An older more polluting car migth not be the better option. But if the new car is one of those giant murde boxes then it’s not going to be an upgrade either.

Exactly

Remove? No. Overcome? We’re already doing it.

Our society is far more accomodating than it has ever been. Different sexes, ethnicities, skin colors, religions, sexual orientations, gender identities and whatnot enjoy more acceptance and equality now than ever before. Something like the EU - a voluntary alliance of this size - would have been unthinkable probably just 100-200 years ago. And for all its flaws the participating nations have grown closer through it.

We still got ways to go particularly internationally and we must be ever vigilat against those that want to drag us backward but the progress is undeniable.

So producing them and shipping them around the globe needs to be reduced dramatically. So that point still kinda stands?

The supply side is the wrong place to tackle this problem though. If you limit the amount of new cars that may be produced, people will simply drive their older ones for longer.

Yeah. Just pipe it to /dev/null

In some places they only allow morning deliveries, then for most of the day cars are banned. This means shops can still easily stock up while keeping the area free of traffic when people are out and about.

Another strategy is not allowing through-traffic by installing modal filters. Which means you’re only gonna drive in there if you actually need to go there. Basically the cul-de-sac idea from suburbia but without the sprawl that pulls everything apart and without restricting bikes and pedestrians to the same convoluted labyrinth.

They seem to have a real problem with speeding (the article mentions up to 50 in a 20 km/h zone). That’s massive. 20 is really just barely more than the idle power of a car. It’s what we have in Switzerland for “encounter” zones where cars are allowed but pedestrians have full priority. Speeding through that at 50 is crazy.

It’s an interesting approach and it seems to be working. So I say good for them. But at the same time I can’t help but think that there might have been more conventional things to try. Signs don’t really work well on drivers. Physics does. A few hefty dips and bumps get drivers to slow down real fucking fast. Looking at a top down image of the intersection there’s a REALLY wide turn on one side that is very obviously tempting to speed through. But there’s also a small “square” next to it which could have easily been extended to make the turn more sharp. A few more of those fat concrete planters and drivers will learn really quickly that this space isn’t for them anymore.

I find this picture hilarious in a really sad and aggravating way. Everyone complains how the bikes block the path for pedestrians, strollers, wheelchairs. But pictured on that very same image is how the entire sidewalk is narrowed to make room for cars. That one car takes up twice as much space as those two bikes and likely transported half an many people. And if you’re on foot, in a wheelchair or pushing a stroller you can move the bicycles out of the way. You can’t move the car out of your way.

I am really excited about these applications. There’s a significant pushback in my country - Switzerland - against renewables under the argument of “where are we gonna put all this energy generation?”. If we can hold up “over agricultural land” as an answer that not only offers huge swaths of land but is also beneficial for the agriculture that’ll be a huge win. If you can show a farmer here, that he’ll get better yields for less water AND can sell the electricity on top of it, he’ll do it no matter how much his party is ranting against renewables.

Obviously we’ll need to figure out which plants benefit from the shade and which don’t. So I’m glad this has already started.

Gee I wonder why people are against folks like you.

Your description sounds so nice and fair - allowing everyone to take full control of their wealth.

So let me ask you: when was the last time you successfully negotiated the price of your groceries or utilities?

You don’t. Because that “fairness” only exists between entities of equal power.

Nah. When you look at the groups that employ body/dash cams (Police, Russian drivers, …) what they have in common is that they are involved in activities that have a high likelyhood to get you involved in altercations and it can be really important to have the incident on camera from the first second on. This simply doesn’t hold true for most people - not to a degree that warrants attaching a permanent surveillance device to your body when you already have an easily accessible on demand camera with you.

Capitalism is an amazing engine to produce wealth. But it’s also extremely opposed to the idea of distributing it.

Cherry sized seedless pommegranate