Myspace existed for a really long time after it ceased to be relevant. It actually only ceased to be relevant after they lost all the music that had been uploaded. That’s when independent musicians finally abandoned it, and it basically disappeared.

Reporting on “X” is what’s keeping it alive, IMHO. Stop reporting on it and it will stop being used. Alternatively, if there’s some major incident, that would probably be enough to finish it. It may eventually go bankrupt between now and then, but it’s actually pretty useful for people wanting to spread nazi propaganda so the far right will probably keep pumping money in until it collapses.

C-x C-f /sudo::/path/to/file

Yeah, in emacs you use tramp to open the file with /sudo::

If I were malicious enough to design the system, I would make it a heartbeat. Skip too many heartbeats and your car bricks. It could be written in to the terms of the loan since companies are using in-car computers for repossession.

“Why is my car bricked?”

“Because you tried to disable our payment verification system.”

“I live in a rural area.”

“You’re like 1% of customers. Your loan contact says you have to drive within cell range once a month. Fuck you, we’re repossessing the car and keeping the money anyway.”

your car is bricked

People who understand technology know that most of the tremendous benefits of AI will never be possible to realize within the griftocarcy of capitalism. Those who don’t understand technology can’t understand the benefits because the grifters have confused them, and now they think AI is useless garbage because the promise doesn’t meet the reality.

In the first case it’s exactly like cryptography, where we were promised privacy and instead we got DRM and NFTs. In the second, it’s exactly like NFTs because people were promised something really valuable and they just got robbed instead.

Management will regularly pass over the actual useful AI idea because it’s really hard to explain while funding the complete garbage “put AI on it” idea that doesn’t actually help anyone. They do this because management is almost universally not technically competent. So the technically competent workers who absolutely know the potential benefits are still not able to leverage them because management either doesn’t understand or is actively engaging in a grift.

deleted by creator

Also fellow emacs user, I see.

Why is “the most incompetent fascist alive can’t use Windows” a Linux meme?

Yeah, there are lots of people who’ve said this and are not also fascists. There’s no reason to platform this scumbag.

But this is really more a product of capitalism than anything else. Under capitalism you just have to keep moving even if you’re just making garbage and debt. There’s no reason to stop and think, because that is seen as a cost (even though it costs more to move without thinking).

Even the best companies that do factor in planning (at least in concept if not actually in practice most of the time) end up with the other problem of “resume driven development” where things that are totally fine and actually working get replaced with things that don’t work because someone needs a new project to get their promotion.

Capitalism produces garbage and puts the people who are least qualified in decision making roles. This still happens in natural systems, but much less. In (healthy) anticapitalist organizing, the people who know the most are generally asked to lead and when they don’t know what to do they stop and figure it out before moving forward.

Aimless wondering can still be a problem, but it’s not forced by the system to continue it’s just people who are learning.

A standard bakfiets puts the cargo lower and the rider higher, but they’re rarely this wide. There are some mail bikes like you’re describing, with cargo in the back. There are also bike trailers. I think this is primarily for moving plants. There are some micro trucks that can haul a pallet in the space of a bike lane.

I mean, the thing here is that the vast majority of use cases are already solved for with bikes, motorcycles, and occasionally microcars or micro trucks and the remaining cases make more sense to be centralized. Like, you go to IKEA here and you have them deliver things to your house because why wouldn’t you? One truck making a bunch of deliveries is more efficient than a bunch of cars driving empty to a warehouse and picking things up. If you need to move things, it makes more sense to pay movers when you need them then to pay €10-15k (or way more, it’s like $10k in the US) every year to have a car. It’s just cheaper to pay movers than to own a car for moving things. There isn’t really a use case for owning a car that makes sense if you have functional infrastructure.

A lot of European cities that were built for cars were rebuilt after being destroyed in WWII. The US destroyed cities, leveled cultural artifacts that can never be replaced, and did so to itself. The US feels like it’s been through a war, but it’s just been cars the whole time.

Yeah, that’s where multimodal really makes sense. Like, take the bike to the train, take the train close, ride the bike the rest of the way. There are train cars marked specifically for bikes. Here in the Netherlands. I still haven’t tried it, but I see people using them all the time.

If you ever drive through rural America, you’ll usually at least see one or two crosses, often on telephone poles, on rural roads. People, often teenagers, die pretty regularly in rural America because of drunk driving.

Some people like it. Some people are just numb to it. It’s just insane to expect people not to when bars are the only social space in a lot of these towns, and those bars are not accessible by anything but car. There is no such thing as a taxi for most of the US (space wise, not population wise).

Assuming the random dafa I got off the internet is true, 5% of the US is covered by parking and the area of the US is 2.4 billion acres, digging these fucking things up and planting trees could sequester about a billion tons of CO2 per year (while, you know, preventing billions of tons from cars). Making all surface parking in to parks with grass and trees could sequester about 6 billion tons per year.

A lot of people grew up being used to a safe county. The idea that the government didn’t actually keep people safe, and that leaders could be so insanely incompetent, was so shocking it was easier to believe in crazy conspiracy theories.

It’s pretty easy to believe in an incompetent government after 9/11, but W came after Clinton and Bush Sr. The first Bush was the head of the CIA. He was evil, but highly competent. Clinton was clearly a world leader, also highly competent. Before that you had Reagan, who was Machiavellian as fuck running secret wars around the world. You had decades of these people looking like they were playing geopolitical 4d chess, then you had this clown who was playing checkers with pidgins. Then you had this incredible shock of the biggest attack on the US since Perl Harbor. It broke a lot of people’s brains.

There’s a book called “Change: How to Make Big Things Happen” that talks about the science behind social change. Basically, a small radical core shifts social networks by reaching about 25% saturation in other networks.

Here’s a podcast that interviews the author of the book: https://hiddenbrain.org/podcast/the-snowball-effect/

So it starts with social networks, then it expands out to action. That escalation path generally follows the salesman principal of asking people to take progressively larger actions.

But yeah, each situation is going to be different. In some cases (I’d probably say most) direct action is the most effective first step. But civic engagement can be effective in a lot of contexts. We basically need to build a movement and have people trying everything all at once, IMHO.

Edit: I also think parking reform is one of the easiest paths available to start tackling the problem. There’s already an established group focused on it, and it focuses squarely on the monetary side of things which is critical.

https://parkingreform.org/

Cars are absolutely going somewhere. Cars won’t exist in 100 years (or will be so rare they will be basically negligible) because either we will have phased them out or they will have brought about the collapse of the complex society needed to support them.

The problem is not just Internal combustion, but a myriad of issues with the most fundamental and intractable being that the fact that geometry hates cars. Car based society has been an experiment that’s only been going for less than 100 years, and it’s already failed. Even with essentially infinite cheap energy, cities like Detroit and Flint, early adopters of car-centric design, are showing us what the future looks like for any city that doesn’t radically change course.

There will be massive suffering, reguarless of the course we take. People will lose massive amounts of wealth. Lots of people will die as the collapse of car infrastructure displaces massive numbers of people. The question is only if we aggressively mitigate the impact of the collapse of car culture, or keep pretending that cars aren’t going away and allow the humanitarian crisis to grow beyond the ability of society to absorb, manage, and recover from it.