You’re translating the problem from : searching through branches that are named according to their ticket and what they are meant to accomplish to: complex and not-context-free git bisect.
> Nuclear as it exists today is not cost competitive.
At the risk of stating the obvious, this notion entirely depends upon your definition of costs, and the definition of what is competitive. It's vastly more costly to society to have unreliable power (e.g., blackouts, brownouts, or weeks on end of lowered usage restrictions) than it is to have slightly more expensive electricity.
There is no rich country in the world with expensive energy.
Yes, I always want to scream “what about the quality of the power?” when people make claims about cost-competitiveness. Electricity is a commodity on the surface, but, as with many technologies, depending on the use case, differences in the qualities of the underlying source matter a great deal. Reduction of all costs to currency can be a damaging abstraction to impose on systems that inherently involve trade-offs between qualities.
Anytime I see these vitamin D (negative) studies I am inclined to yawn and just assume we are trying to deflect attention from “stay inside and don’t get sunlight and try not to get sick” covid mandates.
We aren’t even scratching the surface of how contra-evidentiary the instructions to the general population (since elites didn’t follow them) were.
Weren't the mandates to actually avoid being /indoors/ and amongst large groups of people? Personally, during lockdowns in the U.S is actually when I've spent the most amount of time outdoors and in the sun during my life, since there was not much else to do.
It’s not nearly as expensive as subsidizing bus routes to the tune of $19 for every $1 of bus fare collected, like in my home town. But it solves about 80% of trips that would require 3x more bus dollars to be invested than are already being squandered.
This solved the last mile problem in a fashion no one else has to date. Every thing else in comparison on both convenience and cost is a joke.
Moving some scooters off of an ADA ramp is the least of our worries. And I’m guessing less than 1% of these wound up in a river, not that any city would care if they didn’t feel threatened in their monopoly on solving traffic problems.
Inefficiently run bus systems are a whole other issue. We need to move away from running largely empty gigantic vehicles over roads when the demand isn't there, and transition to public transit that aggressively scales based on data-driven demand measurements.
I don't know why on-demand public transit systems aren't more popular.
Edit:
> Moving some scooters off of an ADA ramp is the least of our worries.
Probably because you're not the person who is called when someone with mobility issues can't get to a bus stop.
> Probably because you're not the person who is called when someone with mobility issues can't get to a bus stop.
I realize you’re accustomed probably to arguing by using these types of straw men with preserved topics that cannot be criticized. But you’ll need to show some data exhibiting how many ramps were blocked by scooters versus other obstacles around here to garner any credibility.
Your anecdata isn’t evidence of anything, and there is a far greater on-balance positive EV to society for solving transportation problems. If we need to pay someone to mind the scooters in the accessible path, that’s a solution. It’s not a reason to discard the only solution that has produced results in the past 75 years.
What I take particular objection to is the suggestion that it’s my lack of empathy for folks needing accessible ramps that drives my affection for having a more convenient life where traffic problems can actually be solved.
Have you ever set up a AzureAD Tenant that can be used with Auth0 to validate any Office365 user (without setting up a specific connection to their own AD/Tenant)? I'm having trouble doing this and so any time I'm on a forum where someone seems to exhibit some experience with Azure, I ask for help. Can pay. DM me if interested, pls.
