I’m generally against the idea of planting as many trees as possible.

Trees are not very good carbon sinks because they decompose and burn. Also, there are also some ecological communities where adding trees makes the land a worse carbon sink.

Avoiding cutting down forests to build suburbs is something I can certainly get behind though.

Do you think anyone ought to go to prison?

If a person has harmed others, and is likely to do more harm in the future, it’s appropriate to remove them from society. This is why prisons exist.

Drivers licence suspension typically is the consequence of crimes that are too minor to warrant prison. In this case, the perpetrator has the chance to make changes to their life to avoid prison. For example, they can accept slow public transit, bike to work, get a closer job, move to a place where it’s easier to live without a car.

Obviously, It will be challenging for the perpetrator to reorganize their life in a way that does not require them to risk harming others, and many will fail.

But your argument that society is required to accept being victimized by dangerous drivers because it would be inhumane to force them to use alternative forms of transportation (used by millions of people too poor to afford a car, even in the most car dependent cities) is absurd.

something like 15,000 empty houses right now

This statistic is meaningless because many of the cities with excess housing are in places with no jobs

building brand new single family homes doesn’t empower the working class, it empowers landlords

This is incorrect. The important statistic to look at is vacancy rate In almost all the major cities in the US vacency rates are well below the tenant empowering 8% and many are below the 5% rate where tenant have a fighting chance. We absolutely need more housing. I’d prefer duplexes, triplexes, row houses and apartments for urbanist reasons, but the idea that building more houses empowers landlords over the proletariat is ridiculous.

That is not an example of market capitalism. It’s an example of regulatory capture by homeowners: capitalist developers would like to build more housing, but homeowners cause the local government to block this.

With housing, we are in an unusual circumstance where both less government intervention (let people build more housing) and more government intervention (build public housing) would be better than the status quo.

In Amsterdam the mode share for all trips is like 30% for biking and for walking and like 20% for driving and for transit

I mean the policy in question was to tax second homes at 10,000%

Presumably that includes houses an organization wants to rent out. It’s hard to imagine that this policy wouldnt make it very difficult to rent

Because it’s good for people to be able to rent a house, and we already subside home ownership enough in the US

They did this in California and Oregon, then the schools went to shit.

Also, property taxes are a good way to encourage density, which is necessary to fight climate change

In the US you sometimes hear that phones in class are necessary to see if your kids are OK in a school shooting scenario.

I think this isn’t a good argument, since school shootings are rare, and it’s unclear if each student having a phone would do more harm than good in that kind of situation.

I don’t see the connection between neurodivergence and phones

Short haul flights should probably be high speed train rides anyway

Snuggling – never. And this doesn’t apply only to men, it applies to women whom I don’t find attractive as well.

What about nonhuman animals? Do you dislike cuddly dogs?

Yes, so I can probably plan for it.

I Love Louis Cole - Thundercat feat. Louis Cole

Louis Cole Sucks - Scary Goldings feat. Louis Cole

I found Google messages to be unreliable: refusing to send a SMS if the Internet connection is bad. The signal that the message failed to send is a single hollow checkmark.

I switched to fossify messages, which just sends SMSs or MMSs and doesn’t create its own flawed messaging protocol

Github

How would virtual environment software, like conda, work without $PATH?

The goal of the zig language is to allow people to write optimal software in a simple and explicit language.

It’s advantage over c is that they improved some features to make things easier to read and write. For example, arrays have a length and don’t decay to pointers, defer, no preprocessor macros, no makefile, first class testing support, first class error handling, type inference, large standard library. I have found zig far easier to learn than c, (dispite the fact that zig is still evolving and there are less learning resources than c)

It’s advantage over rust is that it’s simpler. Ive never played around with rust, but people have said that the language is more complex than zig. Here’s an article the zig people wrote about this: https://ziglang.org/learn/why_zig_rust_d_cpp/

But it’s somewhat wasteful to build an entire industrial plant that’s only run at 10% capacity