RiderExMachina

Honestly, if I were to choose suicide, I'd go for a nitrogen slumber. Seems like a painless way to go.

This makes sense to me, actually. Letters are usually taught with false sounds, and N and K could phonetically be taught as "nuh" and "kuh" by a teacher.

And their cousin, Whiney the Achoo

AI is basically just "heuristically, sentences usually look like this, and when this word is used in this context, the next word is usually..." And so on.

There is no "thinking" behind ChatGPT, no real understanding of the topics it's provided. Just a computer that provides sentences in a way that make humans attempt to humanize it.

It's possible to change anything, the main question is the cost of doing so.

Google has already created something called Fuchsia which is reportedly very fast and potentially more secure than Android. But Google already has nearly 20 years of an existing ecosystem in Android that they would effectively be giving up because app manufacturers would have to make new apps for the new system.

They've probably ran the numbers to see how much it would cost to perform the new roll-out vs how much income it would bring, and I would guess that making such a massive change just wouldn't be worth it.

This is my opinion as a random person on the internet: no. The kernel only affects what hardware it can be ran on. Everything else that would make a difference to end users is basically done in userspace.

The thing holding Android back is its JVM layer between the kernel and the userspace. This adds overhead, meaning your phone needs more RAM or it will have performance issues. You also need slower default animations to cover up the increased loading times from this overhead, which make the system seem slow, especially when compared to iPhones.

To quote one of the commenters in the HN discussion:

You will have to solve the epidemic of homelessness and crime in high-density areas of the United States before people will accept using mass transit. I fully support doing so - I would for example support a national project to build cheap concrete housing for all who need it - but that's the barrier.

I've straight up had people tell me that even if Public Transportation were convenient and consistent, they still wouldn't take it because Public Transportation is famous for being pretty dirty and having large potential for crime.

I'd like to have some sort of quick, easy solution, but I think changing that perception is going to take time, and the time the US is taking to revitalize Public Transportation isn't making that happen any faster.

This was my first thought as well

If you take out the star, there are only two lines; one connected by the upper two circles, and one connecting the "dog nose" on the right to the lower bouncing circle.

You're coming at it from the wrong angle. The reason it's worth more is not because the owners are paying more in taxes, but rather, the costs to maintain the neighborhood are less, allowing the money to be used for other improvements.

Strong Towns and Not Just Bikes both go over the math more in other articles/videos, but I'll try to provide a decent summary.

Basically, the cost to maintain the roads and infrastructure in a city are paid for by everyone in the area, and because cities are usually smaller and mixed-use, you have several homes and businesses chipping in to pay the same mile of asphalt and water/sewer.

When you get to the suburbs, even though they pay more in taxes because they're larger and newer, they're also more spread out, often with a large highway out to them. They require this dedicated infrastructure line, and still require fire/police/garbage services, which requires more staffing, more buildings, and more trucks.

Imagine you're playing two games of Cities Skylines.

In the first game, you have small, 2-lane roads, your houses and apartment buildings are small, one-four block sizes, you have a corner store every other street, and because everything is within 5 blocks, people walk to their destination. You really only need one fire station, one police station, and a dump.

In the second game, you have a highway to a residential-only area. All your residences are 6 blocks big and in cul-de-sacs. You'd likely have to have one police/fire stations on one side of the suburb and one on the other in order to get full coverage. They'd require their own garbage dump in order to get the best service, and you'd have to run sewer/water lines out to them.

Which of these cities do you think would do better financially?

If you'd like more supplementary reading/watching here are the other videos that go into this more in-depth:

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syP8g8HBcy4
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QP5UCwMTjFk
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyDRZjgiraY
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Nw6qyyrTeI

That last video is actually part of a whole playlist, which starts here: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLJp5q-R0lZ0_FCUbeVWK6OGLN69ehUTVa

You haven't met some of my coworkers