I don't even know where to begin here. Of course we have the land to spread people out, but it's insanely expensive on everyone (especially those who are spread out) over time to sustain it. [1]
You have a lot of straw man arguments that but the one that I'll focus on the most is "Our leaders just FORCE us to flock to cities cpz it's cheaper on infrastructure" - prove it.
Infrastructure work is supervised and licensed by the goverment. You cant start building a city in the middle of nowhere even if its your own land. You have to follow standards and regulations enforced on you.
Last time I checked it looks similar in every 1st world country. Ppl are slowly losing means of production and being moved to subscription plan to even live.
Tl;Dr: it's tricky. and because it's not that simple.
I don't know your background and maybe you're from a first nation or tribe, but there isn't a common agreement between the populations of existing tribes and nations on what is offensive or incorrect. This isn't to say that any term is acceptable, but Indians, however incorrectly labeled by a colonizing group a few hundred years ago, is literally how some choose to identify themselves here in North America.
I say this as someone from India and event there, there isn't a common agreement or knowledge to arrive at an "inoffensive" term for folks who live here. Most just use the descriptor left by the British and say "Red Indians" with no malice implied.
Granted...this particular situation was unique as the development was market-rate units, not low-income, in a communal living layout. There were other concerns on part of neighbors (some real, some silly, and others just simply obstructive). This, along with CEQA in California have been constantly used by existing members of a town/city/neighborhood/etc to reduce additional development of any kind, not just low-income.
This is at a point where NIMBY isn't even the only acronym anymore, BANANAs is the new one the kids use these days - Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything.
Thanks for introducing a new (to me) term, i.e BANANAS. Upon searching i discovered a few others:
NIABY: Opposition to certain developments as inappropriate anywhere in the world is characterised by the acronym NIABY ("Not In Anyone's Backyard"). The building of nuclear power plants, for example, is often subject to NIABY concerns.
NAMBI: ("Not Against My Business or Industry") is used as a label for any business concern that expresses umbrage with actions or policy that threaten that business, whereby they are believed to be complaining about the principle of the action or policy only for their interests alone and not for all similar business concerns who would equally suffer from the actions or policies.
BANANA: is an acronym for "Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything" (or "Anyone").The term is most often used to criticize the ongoing opposition of certain advocacy groups to land development. The apparent opposition of some activists to every instance of proposed development suggests that they seek a complete absence of new growth.
NOPE: (Not On Planet Earth)To leave an uncomfortable situation, usually quickly.
LULU: Locally Unwanted/Undesirable Land Use planning.
NOTE: Not Over There Either (meaning is same NIMBY)
SF real estate is just bitcoin HODLing with real life homeless camp attached. The entire property value is propped up by artificially voted on rules greatly raising the mining difficulty to entrants and it's getting exponentially more difficult with time.
This seems to vary from person to person. I personally think that it hurts a little bit for a few seconds, as do most of my friends that have the same device, but other friends call it torture. I guess their pain threshold is different. I gladly trade the 3 seconds of mild stinging for days of itching.
Please don't act like Amazon is the only shop around. They are a terrible shop, actively adversarial to their merchants and customers. They are chock full of fake reviews, they comingle inventory, and practice many dark patterns.
Most people think that Amazon sells all the products on their site - because Amazon designs their site to look like it. Even young people who are technically literate are fooled. This results in a lot of harm..
Thanks for promoting other options. When recommending books I use worldcat.org links rather than the more-exploitative for-profit vendors.
In the interest of making more art available to more people, independent of spending-money, I’d rather us collectively invest more in public libraries. To what degree do public libraries fund authors?
You're welcome. I am not sure but I agree, we need as much free information as possible. Libgen and scihub are invaluable! I don't know if libraries fund authors but that would certainly be a cool model to have.
I just bought something from amazon and it turns out it was coming from a seller in another country and i had to pay an extra £24 in import duties and carrier charges. Nowhere on the listing did it say it was coming from outside the UK.
I am sorry to hear that. Amazon's UI is purposely designed to make it difficult to notice this kind of information. Buyers are lulled into a false sense of assuredness.
Quite and apparently everyone else thinks I deserved it for some reason! Fairly standard makita accessory, none of FFXtools, Axminster, Toolstop or even eBay had it in stock only place that came up in search was amazon. It was out of stock on amazon but was advertised in the side bar as available through a third party seller by the name of something like 'KAMAC Machine Tools' i.e. an english sounding name. If I'd investigated the company I would have found that they were in Italy, but the price was listed in Sterling and there was no text anywhere that led me to believe that this was an import. I know because I went back and screengrabbed the page after I got the bill from UPS. Its not worth my time to pursue it any further with Amazon, Startup Idea: an AI chatbot that I can deploy to argue with their AI chatbot about this.
HN downvotes 90% of my comments. I wouldn't take it to heart. It's not common for the herd mentality to do anything but pile on. Plus you have to keep in mind that many of the users here are employed by Amazon and are in perpetual self-denial of the unethical nature of their employer. The cognitive dissonance is necessary for them to avoid an actual understanding of how they enable it all, regardless of whatever division they may reside within ("I'm just an AWS dev. Pissing in bottles, what's that got to do with me?!!")
Then you factor in the astroturfing by contracted subsidiaries through shilled comments and votes/likes/dislikes all over the broader internet.
My advice is to get used to the downvotes. When there are few comments but many downvotes, it's pretty indicative of a poor attempt to suppress valid information. They have no counter arguments, just a supression button. Consider your task accomplished. ;-)
Whoa! Fancy seeing you here, Pat. Always cool to see a fellow Planeteer in the wild :)
also, ditto what he said. This news was certainly an interesting conversation that happened at Planet HQ today, but a couple of folks knew the people doing this work in Amazon before it was announced today. There are a lot of regulatory, licensing, and construction hurdles. Not the mention, the placement of the ground stations is going to be crucial, but otherwise...I can see upstarts in the smallsat industry totally taking advantage of this should their orbits compliment the deployment sites of the ground stations.
We build and operate our own ground stations for the most part and I can understand/sympathize that we're fortunate enough to do so since much of our business depends on it. It's a costly exercise for sure...
While I am enjoying the Jetsons-like future that is envisioned in your post, I'm quite curious how we can maybe do simpler solutions. For example, we used to have a milkman who just dropped off milk on our front door. I can easily imagine dairies owning their own regional distribution networks with autonomous vehicles performing milk deliveries for much cheaper. No domestic robot really needed to sign for the order.
Same goes for groceries, I suppose. A co-op of farms operate an automated warehouse together whose responsibility is to consolidate the various fruits and vegetables and distribute via autonomous vehicles to homes. It gives a competitive advantage to regional farms so they can actually still do things at a reasonable economy of scale.
Just my two cents. Also, yes, video games all day. :)
The domestic robot and video games part was tongue-in-cheek but your idea of locally-sourced, fair-trade, free-range, antibiotics-free, non-GMO, brownie-points-loaded options could greatly benefit from this type of logistics setup. Really what this does is make it a lot easier to never have to leave your home for any reason if you don't want to. There are some people with this type of phobia now who can work from home and have everything they need delivered to them, but they are an abnormal exception. As the cost over going out to get your own stuff versus staying at home and having it all come to you drops toward zero I wonder if anti-social reclusion might become an unintended consequence.
https://interestingengineering.com/innovation/the-spies-who-...
https://yawboadu.substack.com/p/stealing-success-how-ip-thef...
https://ipwatchdog.com/2017/07/05/americas-industrial-revolu...