cjet79
Anarcho Capitalist on moral grounds
Libertarian Minarchist on economic grounds
User ID: 124
cjet79
2d ago
I think it is more of a symptom of the breakdown of communities. Shame works pretty well for someone within your congregation.
Someone with no attachments to others? No family, no religious community, no coworkers, etc. it's gonna bounce right off them.
cjet79
2d ago
I think they just nominated Trump as king and kind of based all social standing on his level of approval. Which works as a quick way to build an alternative system, but maybe is not the best long term solution.
cjet79
2d ago
Shame should be for those you love, and for when you can feel pride about them in equal or greater measure.
I think it works well as a tribal adaptation, for when someone else's actions can reflect on you personally, or when you realize that your own actions have caused a great decrease in social standing among you and your closest people.
The weaponization of shame against your out group just leads to your out group being inoculated against all shame. It is unlikely to stop their behavior long term.
cjet79
3d ago
Original article was proposing enforcement of rules against bikers. I do know that cities often have cops on bicycles.
Maximum speed and some enforced guidelines on sidewalks sounds great. Where places are less dense enforcement would be hard but also less necessary as there would be fewer pedestrians.
Roadways for motorized vehicles, sidewalks for human powered things.
cjet79
3d ago
I'd be fine with bikes lanes on side walks. Usually bike lanes are added to roads, if sidewalks were just enlarged and the bike lanes were added to them that would seem better to me.
cjet79
3d ago
Sorry slight exaggeration. I can imagine people dying from a simple fall, it just seems less likely than when they get hit by a car.
cjet79
3d ago
Bikes yield to everyone on nature paths and it has not effectively banned them at all. Instead such paths are filled with bikers.
I'd be fine with bikes only on streets in areas of less than 30mph speeds. As soon as it hits 35 though they are asking cars to generally slow down to accommodate them. At 45mph I think they are a danger to themselves and all other drivers.
I'm fine with effectively banning what I'd consider "racing cycling" this ain't the tour de France. Just like highways aren't NASCAR or formula 1. All people in shared commute spaces have to sacrifice the top speed of their vehicle for the safety of themselves and others.
cjet79
3d ago
The deaths to pedestrians from cyclists seems like a bad statistic for either side to bring up, and a bad statistic in general.
- Cars are obviously more deadly on a per incident basis. I can't imagine a pedestrian surviving if I hit them regular speed in a car. I can't imagine a pedestrian dying if I hit them regular speed on a bike.
- Bike incidents are likely to be high, they share more spaces with pedestrians. Cars and pedestrians rarely overlap, they tend to intersect.
- The per mile deadliness makes bikes actually sound really deadly given how non deadly they seem. But that statistic is thrown off by high miles travelled by cars and low by bikes.
I think the risk to pedestrians seems minimal and bikes should just fully share the sidewalk with pedestrians. Bikes hitting people is most likely to ruin both people's day, but cars hitting bikes is most likely to ruin someone's life.
Every cyclist I've ever suggested this to hates it, and I think it's just because they don't like going as slow as you sometimes need to go on a sidewalk to be safe. But it is often what they are asking drivers to do: go slowly for the cyclists safety on the road. Which is when it turns into a whole political question. No one likes going slower than they can, so who has to suffer the indignity drivers or cyclists?
The answer seems obvious in my head, but I know I identify with drivers more (despite riding a bike around the neighborhood pretty often)
cjet79
4d ago
I think lots of games end up encouraging unfun tactics and have to have artificial rules in place to prevent those strategies from dominating.
One obvious rule like this is just a raw limit on numbers. Matches are x vs x. Some MMOs like EVE online dont enforce this, and EVE as a result became heavily about how many people you could field.
FPS games have problems with "camping" and snipers. But hiding and killing the enemy from a distance when they don't have a chance to fight back is an objectively smart thing to do in a real war situation.
Flanking is one of the most basic tactics that tends to organically evolve all the time and not get whacked down by developers.
In RTS games: basically everything except has a real world analog.
cjet79
5d ago
That is interesting, I'm not surprised I like the books better, but I wouldn't have thought many other people were the same.
The books can be sparse on details in a way that I like. The show fills in those visual details, mostly because it is forced to do so by the medium of film.
Yeah the BLS does good stats.
They also do various measurements for "unemployed" too https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm
More options
Context Copy link