Slashdot Mirror
In SF: an App For Auctioning Off Your Public Parking Spot
trbdavies (979982) writes 'Only in San Francisco' used to refer to issues like whether public nudity should be restricted to certain hours of the day. Now I hear it most often in connection with the interplay between the city and tech companies. SF Weekly reports on one such development: 'Anyone who's visited San Francisco for 35 minutes knows that easy parking is a rare find. Enter Paolo Dobrowolny, an Italian tech bro who decided San Francisco was the perfect spot to test out his new experiment. Here's how it works: You find a parking spot, revel a little, let Monkey Parking know where you're located, and watch the bidding begin. Finally, give your spot to the wealthiest victim willing to pay the highest price for your spot. Drive away that much richer.'" Update: 05/08 15:52 GMT by T : I suspect that Dobrowolny's a tech pro, rather than bro, or at least that's what I suspect the Weekly meant to say.
"Tech bro"?
Go home, Slashdot, you're drunk.
Dog is my co-pilot.
You pay your parking fee to park there.
You are not entitled to resell that right. Only the townhall can.
And finally, I just need to locat the bidder, go there with my car first and wait for the parking fee(s) to expire.
As soon as the car moves away, I get the spot. All legal!
Ah!
Yes, lets encourage people to just let their cars sit there until you pay them.
SF Municipal Transit Authority has understood how to screw people for needing to park for decades. Now there's an app for that, yay.
Wonder if you'll start having people drive around all day looking for prime parking just to auction it off...
Could you make more doing that than a minimum wage job in the city?
Wonder how high some of the auctions will get...
So, somebody can take a 9-to-5 worker's slot in the parking lot 3 minutes before they get there, and the employee has to pay the "parker" whatever they want for the spot, or risk losing their job? This one stinks so bad it needs a local ordnance. Is the California Legislature in session?
I love this idea!
It helps to connect the rich cunt demographic with the thieving cunt demographic.
Leaving less cuntiness in the world for non-cunts.
badly.
Hording a public thing you do not own and then scalping it won't go well, and will be banned by the courts.
And when you get in your car to leave, and I stop to get the spot, I sure as hell will not move just because you want to sell something you do not own to someone else. So there is a logistic issue.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
This is an interesting idea. It creates a possibility of earning a living simply by being a douchebag, driving around, taking spots and auctioning them off. If you ride a motorcycle, you could use its zip and maneuverability, as well as lower operating costs, to really clean up - or even create an enterprise by having a team of such bikes working for you. I like it.
I imagine this will not play well in the insanity of the People's Republic of California - esp. in SF, land of the "we don't like these super efficient busses operating because.......our rents our high!".
My gut: the fascists will not delay in making it illegal to sell your parking spot.
Oh stop it. There are enough short sighted assholes who jump to violence. Don't be one.
How about we use the court system? you know like a civilized country.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Leave SF. If you can't afford it, it means you're not supposed to be living there. Period! The US has so much freaking landmass and other cities. I'm convinced that SF has reached economic critical mass for the majority of people living there or thinking of living there. There's only so much space to go around.
Or public transit, like a really civilized country.
You can't sell public property.
I for one wholly endorse this newfound libertarian dystopia and have devised a competitive service called turd auction. Heres how it works: i leave a bathroom stall at a public stadium or park, and users logged into my site then meet up and fight eachother to the death in mortal combat to determine who can then prostitute their children to raise enough money for the half roll of shit tickets left in the stall.
Good people go to bed earlier.
We're talking SF here, not civilized countries.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
All the homeless would need if this passes is a beat up old clunker that barely moves. They can sleep in their cars and then move when they get paid. While this might solve the homeless problem in SF, I suspect it will only make parking SF even more difficult given that every old clunker in the State will be moving into the city to take advantage of the new income.
Assuming they're paying for parking and not staying longer than they're allowed to, how is it "hoarding"?
And how is it "scalping"? They're merely offering to delay leaving their spot if someone pays them to do so. Basically they're selling their time.
Ultimately I think the app would need to give the general location to everyone, but the exact spot should only go to the individual selected by the person leaving the spot.
And not that I'm blaming the government. I just hope that whomever is involved in this as a profiteer gets followed to their home and beaten to within an inch of their life.
Actually, a form of this has been going on in San Diego for some time, but with golf tee times. Torrey Pines is a public golf course that the PUBLIC gets to use. Each and every damn morning, two or three groups (with a dozen or so low-income/shelter 'contractors') phone in and grab ALL of the daily tee times. These folks then turn around and sell them for 3x to 5x the normal public price.
The city can't do a damn thing about them, since each reservation is under a different name......
Toil is Stupid. Don't be Stupid.
I don't understand wanting to live anywhere in California. It is absolutely INFESTED, in multiple ways. I routinely get inquiries from recruiters there and my response is always the same: "It sounds like a good opportunity, but no amount of money will entice me to live or work in the People's Republic of California. Thank you for your interest and good luck on your hire."
1. Walk up to spot. Stand next to car I do not own. ....
2. Check in with app
3. Accept Bids
4.
5. Profit (and run like Hell)
Thank God this was the first comment. The entire post induced smdh but that was just over the top.
This ends in destruction of property.
Either the sellers' or the buyers cars will suffer from spontaneous combustion. And thus will this idea die.
And when they go to the police and say "My car was burned!" the police will reply with something close to a "hmmm. Ok. Did you see who did it? No? Well, tough luck."
someone please explain to me why you'd want to live in such a massive city?
Baseball, and beer, and also hookers
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Some people are willing to pay the extra costs of living in order to have access to an immense amount of culture. NYC has several orchestras, a world-class opera and theatre scene, and readings by prominent literary figures nearly every night of the week. If you like fine dining, you have a vaster range of choices there than elsewhere.
You have to truck in everything and truck out everything,
The suburbs also have to truck everything in and out: it's not like local farmland and local factories provide even a tiny percentage of the goods and foodstuffs used there.
Rural areas also have to truck most things in and out, for mostly the same reasons. The way the world economy is structured, pretty-much EVERYTHING is trucked in and out from somewhere else. It's a myth that non-urban areas somehow are less reliant on the "outside" than urban areas.
More to the point, there is a massive economy of scale in cities. New brings in goods in bulk, which then require minimal internal redistribution compared to, say, strip malls in suburbia.
All of that aside, cities are where basically all jobs are. Why would anyone start a company that requires skilled workers in a place with a small talent pool? How many coders or engineers live in any rural town, or even within a day's commute of one? How many live within walking distance of a building in New York?
Look at the job listings in any small town, and then look at the job listings in New York or Boston or San Fran. There's nothing to do in exchange for money in small towns and rural places for most of us. There's no career path at all.
Hell, there's also just NOTHING TO DO. We live in New York because we can walk to one of two dozen brunch places on Sunday morning. We can see opera, musical theatre, the symphony, an off-broadway play, slam poetry, a puppet show, or basically anything we want any day of the week. Want to play an obscure German board game? Thousands of people live basically next do and also want to do so. How many people would be interested in that kind of game in a town of 2000 people?
GeekNights!
Late Night Radio for Geeks!
Massive cities are, by all measures, more efficient than suburban life or rural life. Distribution of resources scales very, very well with population density. Trucking in and out food is orders of magnitude greener than producers sending out 1000 smaller trucks much farther across sprawling rural areas, then everyone trucking themselves around to the grocery store 10-20 minutes away. Wiring power to a 30 floor apartment building is much more efficient than stringing copper to an equal number of suburban homes. Heating a large building with a huge steam boiler, when divided out, is much more efficient than heating the equivalent in suburban homes with electricity, gas, or any theoretical technology! Thermodynamics are just plain working against you!
You seem to just be trolling for replies early in the article so I'm not going to waste time pulling up links. I'm sure others in the community have plenty handy. But if you are being earnest, just think about it for half a second. You might find the way of life unpleasant. That's ok. Many people do. It falls in and out of style over time. But come on, man.
But what is the alternative? How efficient is it to live in a rural or suburban area, where you have to drive everywhere, have goods trucked into huge Walmarts. You are screwing up a large area of land, and companies/the government use the non developed areas as dumps for chemicals, garbage, etc.
i realize that people unable to survive communicating with others, sharing things, etc. like living in 'safe' wide open spaces, but that doesnt mean it is efficient, desirable, or even practical.
I'm not trying to be a proponent of dense cities - they seem like a bit of a grind to me too.
But no matter where you live, they're still trucking in your groceries, and trucking out your trash -- and they're probably driving farther to do it. You just don't see it as much because of the wider spacing. Plus, you're using more resources to get wherever it is you're going as it's most likely farther away and you're going to use a more inefficient method of transportation.
I thought San Francisco already had dynamic parking prices to try to use market forces to keep parking available. They have devices to monitor parking utilization. The goal is to typically have one on-street parking spot open per block; somewhere around 85% utilization. If the block is consistently above that, the price increases. If it's below, the price lowers. They adjust the prices by $.25 every month.
From the talk on this that I saw, they generally improved the availability of parking though the dynamic pricing. Employees who park every day would find the cheaper blocks to park on, leaving the busier blocks open for customers.
Maybe the program isn't working as well as they claimed. Maybe the program isn't covering enough of the city, and the approach in the article is of more use in other parts.
Idiots who are squatting on parking spots trying to "sell" that parking spot
are asking for trouble from so many different sources they will need to keep
an orthopedic surgeon and a lawyer on speed dial.
Sorry, we "Yuropeans" (what's that?) don't like rust. But we like spelling, grammar, busses, trains, (and economic cars), disarmed people, welfare, public healthcare, and everything else sane that scares America. Thank you.
It's insightful.
...mainly because they could park TWO cars in the same space a stupid SUV uses :-P.
How is this different than me parking in front of someone, backing up until I'm 2cm from their bumper, then telling them "Let's start the bidding at $200"? Once they talk me down to $100, I move my car, and they can leave. That's extortion. This is the same thing, only the paywall is moved a little down the line.
If this isn't already illegal it should be soon. What's next, auctioning trolly seats or the best gazebos in the park? This is essentially scalping.
Why do you think public transportation is a European thing? In Hong Kong or Tokyo even relatively wealthy people take the train to work just like everyone else.
Cities ate not more efficient than suburbs by every measure; if they were, it would be cheaper, not more expensive, to live in cities. There are diseconomies of density which result in groceries, electricity, etc costing MORE in cities, not less.
I think it has to do mostly with the fact that historically, SF and NY were harbor cities. The industry arising from it created a max exodus of people looking for work, and the whole thing just ballooned because people go where the jobs are, creating pools of demand, attracting business, which attracts people, and so on and so forth.
1000 smaller trucks delivering stuff
you just described NYC
and the heating part, lots of old buildings have ancient inefficient boilers that pollute. the upper east side has some of the worst air quality. newer burb homes will have newer and efficient boilers
I lived in Boston for a while and the parking is just as bad there as it is in SF. For those of you that have not visited the fine city of Boston, allow me to enlighten you. Boston is an historical city and, as such, has numerous historical buildings. Buildings that cannot be knocked down in order to widen roads. The road that Paul Revere travelled on is just as wide now as it was then.
Lots of one way streets and lots of one hour parking. The cops there would ride around with little bits of chalk. The first time through they would put a chalk mark on the tires of the cars in the one hour parking zone. An hour later they return and any car there with chalk on the tire gets a ticket. So of course it became a game of cat and mouse - cop puts chalk, car owner rubs it off.
When it snows it's worse because the snow plows can't get through so you would have to park on alternate sides of the street depending on the day of the week. If you're caught on the wrong side when the snow plows come through they just tow your car.
The moral of the story is that if you live in Boston, or SF for that matter, take public transportation whenever you can. Driving and parking in either of those cities is a pain in the ass and is to be avoided at all costs.
One of the reasons I left Boston was the traffic and parking. I got sick of it.
Naturally, this app is going to get banned. You don't own the land you are parking your car on. The owner of the parking lot sets the price, not the person renting the spot.
Just use the app, find the spot, then park behind them
I think here we have the very definition of "unclear on the concept".
If there ever WAS parking behind them, they wouldn't be able to sell the spot now would they?
That spot behind them was claimed last week...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
This is why the people of San Francisco are tearing open your Google buses and shitting down your throats.
All the homeless would need if this passes is a beat up old clunker that barely moves.
If you had ever been homeless you would be less quick to write the idiotic crap
you wrote above.
Life has a funny way of humbling people like you. If I were you I'd be very worried for my own
future, after making such remarks as you wrote above. When you end up homeless, be sure
to remember how you made such a tasteless remark about homeless people on Slashdot.
What I loved aout Europe was there wasn't a need for a car - unlike here in the most of the States. Not having to worry about parking or getting booted or towed or feeding the meter or .....
People bitch about European taxes. Well, take you car payment, insurance, maintenance, gas, registration, emissions testing and eliminate them.
You now have how much left per month? $400 - $500 - more?
And let's mention the reduction of stress from having to deal with all the chores associated with that car. I have to make time to go and get my car checked for emissions - and it'll pass - but I have to do it for the "privalege" of driving - even though it IS a nessessity here in the States.
Back to taxes...
Add in a single payer medical system - not this Obamacare crap - and those high European taxes do not seem so bad.
They are not perfect, but they have solved some social problems a bit better than we have.
Most of that would come down to higher rents, basically.
The only thing that really rises up cost of living in cities is supply vs demand. People who live in cities want to live close by stuff, almost by definition, and they pay a premium for it. That raises up land price, which trickles all the way down to things like groceries (can you imagine the cost of the land to build a large grocery store in SF/Boston/NYC? yeah...).
That explains almost all of the cost difference. Not all of it, but almost.
"Nobody drives in New York. The traffic's too bad." - Fry
This is exactly how high frequency trading works. They know you want to park near your work at 8am. So they take an empty spot at 7:59 and then sell the spot to you.
Reminds me when as a kid I stood in line for the "systembolaget" and sold it to the norwegians
I think parking spot isn't what you think it is. After all it is SF we're talking about here.
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
I'm sure the city and private owners will have no trouble with you auctioning off property that isn't yours. The state and IRS will also not have any problem with you collecting this extra income under the table.
Proverbs 21:19
You can say the same thing about any large city.
SF is a case of they really need to move out. It like NYC is a geographically constrained city. Cities like Chicago, Miami-Fort Lauderdale, Dallas-Fort Worth, Atlanta, Houston, and even LA offer lower cost housing and less traffic than SF or NYC.
Here is a list of the best downtowns from Liveablity. NYC and SF are no on the list.
http://livability.com/top-10/t...
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
"..we like spelling, grammar, busses..."
Apparently, you don't like spelling very much.
And a lot of low - moderate income people have to suffer. SF is a beautiful city, but I wouldn't live there until the money/greed situation subside to more sane and manageable levels.
Isn't it illegal to use your phone while driving in CA?
bwa ha ha ha haaaaa
and so, tell me: HOW MANY new yukkers actually GO TO these orchestras, etc ? ? ? (and how many are tourists ?)
a piss-soaked asphalt hell-scape of unceasing noise, pushy assholes, and desolate canyons of high rises filled with rich pukes (or their droids) who don't give a shit about you except that you get them their bonbons double-time...
yeah, sign me up for that...
plus BARELY a hint of green/nature unless you go into some shit park...
besides, 'city that never sleeps' ? bullshit, when i visited there, i had a better chance of going bowling/whatever, and getting a decent burger within minutes at 2 in the morning in my little cowtown, than in that concrete jungle...
big cities are a CANCER upon the face of the planet: they DEPEND upon the resources of everyone else to provide them with EVERYTHING they can not...
i 'depend' upon big cities for...
nothing
Culture is the guy who PLAYS the violin. People that scurry around in ovecrowded cities arguing over parking spots and the regulations thereof is... something else.
Since they aren't incredibly wasteful for a false sense of "freedom" that only enables stress and accidental deaths?
please explain to me why you'd want to live in such a massive city?
Because I like living near people...and I want to live near people with a similar mindset. The percentage of small-minded, insular xenophobes gets too high for my tastes when population density drops.
What if I want to go mountain biking? What if I want to go hiking? What if I want to plant a large garden? What if I want to launch high power model rockets? What if I want to ride my motorcycle without traffic? What if I want to rebuild an old car?
It all depends on what you want to do. Opera? Not really my thing? They symphony? Yes but I can do that with a 30 minute drive and minimal traffic where I am at. Theater? The same.
Of course I am not in a town of 2000 people but a town of 200,000 just 25 minutes from Palm Beach which is one of the richest cities in the nation so we get a lot of high end stuff. Did I mention that the crime rate is also very low and the air and water quality is very high?
The ideal location depends on the person. Take a look at the job openings in Melbourne Florida, the Palm Beach area, and Fort Lauderdale. The company that I work for even has it's own fab.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Cities ate not more efficient than suburbs by every measure; if they were, it would be cheaper, not more expensive, to live in cities.
City prices are demand-driven, not supply-driven. Cities cost more because more people want to live in cities.
This is San Francisco , guns are frowned upon.
What you should have said is "Hopefully a vigilante steps forward and shows up only to organize a protest #hateparkingcapitalistscum #payyourfairshare"
If the App proves popular, I'm sure the citizens would ask for the city to put a stop to this practice. The city will respond by making a new penalty for squatting on public spaces for profit and eventually the city's traffic department will start using the App to track down parking places up for auction and issuing parking fines.
These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
Not really. Not all large American cities have even one orchestra or opera, let alone the multiple orchestras in NYC (including multiple new-music ensembles). The same goes for theatre. Some people just want that much choice.
even here in the USA, Washington, DC, NY,NY, and San Francisco all have reasonably good public transportation systems.
Are you confused? Paying somebody for a ticket to see the athletes in a way that isn't allowed is "scalping".
Public transportation is Communism, pure and simple. Oh, it all starts innocently enough -- one day, you're just riding the bus to work. But before you know it, the zombified corpse of Josef Stalin is running amok across the country, nationalizing our industries and forcing our children to learn about evolution and heliocentrism.
No thanks. I'll stick with my armored three-ton Humvee for my ten-mile commute to work.
I live in a city where we pay for parking at a meter and get a receipt with the expiration time. Often times, if one is completed with their business and there's a good chunk of time left on the receipt, they will affix it to the meter so that the next person doesn't have to pay. I much prefer my city to San Francisco when it comes to parking etiquette.
You aren't selling the space. You are selling information that the spot will be available at a certain time.
Would is also be illegal to sell a map showing what times streets generally have full parking? There's no difference.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
You are forgetting another benefit--more small and medium sized companies to work for. Not everyone is interested in working for $MEGACORP. Typically small and medium sized businesses are founded wherever there is a need and where the founder lives. That usually means suburbia, although sometimes $MEGACITY.
Some would call it career limiting, I call it a very minor tradeoff for what I really want: Space.
This got me thinking of different queuing situations in the RL, for example the long line of women that queue up outside the women's restroom. How does this parking app compare with one where a woman gets into a stall, stays there while she posts her spot in it, waits for the auctions to roll in and gives up her space to the winner? I think the similarities are striking.
Now, you are alluding to our housing policies - this drive to the suburbs.
it's funny; we have to take out loans for houses. Take out loans for cars. And take out loans for education.
I tell you, we are a fucked up society that is geared towards enslaving people with debt.
Move closer to work?
Hah! It's too expensive! And when work is in the suburbs, housing prices skyrocket.
Cheaper car? Hah! Find a reliable one you can get with cash!
Education? The days of working you way through school are over - I don't care where you go.
No sir, look at the big picture here. You can see it.
And no, I am not saying there is some sort of "conspiracy. All I'm saying is that our cultural "myth" has us chasing an unsustainable living standard.
That's what drove the colapse of '08 - people using inflated house equity to keep their living standards.
And living standards are yet another topic ....
This thread can unravel for a VERY long time....
If this catches on, expect it to 1) be declared illegal and 2) parking meters or similar devices to be placed in each spot that prominently mark it as a "no parking zone" for some short, random, un-announced time after the spot is vacated.
In other words, when you leave, a red "no parking here for the next few minutes" light flashes. The light will go off at some random time between 2 and 10 minutes later and there will be no indication of when it will go off.
If you are caught parking there or sitting there waiting for the light to change, you will be ticketed.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
You know what, I don't feel the compelling need to argue against people who say "it's communism", because that's not any sort of invalidation of something.
You can loiter, your car cannot.
Your car is legally parked. There is no issue.
You are wandering around, not loitering. There is no issue.
Selling your spot means that you are telling someone that at a chosen time you will be at your spot leaving in your car. In fact the exact opposite of loitering.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Just got back from my first visit to San Fran.
Public Transit there is in pretty good shape. Spent 11 days there and didn't once feel like I NEEDED a car. Of course, I wasn't trying to commute in from outer suburbia to work every day - that might be a different animal than touristing around everywhere by bike, bus, cable car and tram.
Much better than in my Canadian city and it's almost balanced budget and free health care and subsidized this and that.
People from big cities like NYC really need to understand that they do not live in the center of the universe and that not everything about living there is wonderful or desirable. I had the option to move to NYC a few years back and I'm glad I didn't. Nothing wrong with living there if it suits you but it's expensive, crowded, claustrophobic, dirty, and uncomfortable (for me). Urban living has its charms but so does rural living. For me the city is a nice place to visit but I have no interest in living there.
The suburbs also have to truck everything in and out: it's not like local farmland and local factories provide even a tiny percentage of the goods and foodstuffs used there.
And you think a lot of food is grown in big cities? And you are wrong about what you can get from local farmland. I could fairly easily source all of my food from within a one hundred mile radius if I was so inclined. Year around and for generally modest cost. Hell I have several very good restaurants I frequent within a modest drive who ONLY source locally and several more that source >80% locally.
It's a myth that non-urban areas somehow are less reliant on the "outside" than urban areas.
It's only a myth if you think of it in terms of total self-sufficiency. I can definitely source more of my food locally and for manufactured goods it's basically a push. No, rural areas aren't self sufficient islands but they generally are more self sufficient overall than urban areas.
All of that aside, cities are where basically all jobs are. There's nothing to do in exchange for money in small towns and rural places for most of us. There's no career path at all.
Not even remotely true. About a quarter of the population of the US lives outside cities. Guess what? They have jobs outside of cities too. Sure there are some jobs that are only available in cities. There also are some jobs that are only available in rural areas. Just depends on what you are trying to do. If you are an IT geek then yeah, you'll probably end up near a city somewhere. For what I do (engineering and accounting) I can be almost anywhere.
Why would anyone start a company that requires skilled workers in a place with a small talent pool?
Depends on what you are doing. There is a lot to be said for being a big fish in a small pond. Skilled workers are not so hard to find in rural areas even if the density of them might be lower. If you are doing manufacturing there actually is a large skilled talent pool in rural areas. Folks who work on farms generally are very mechanically inclined and well trained on the sort of skilled labor tasks you need to run a factory. Welding, machine operation/repair, etc. Also the labor tends to be less expensive and there is a non-trivial population of people who actually are attracted to non-urban areas.
Hell, there's also just NOTHING TO DO.
Only if you are a hermit that never goes outside your house. I live in a rural area. Within a 10 mile radius of my house I can: run, road bike, mountain bike, fish, hike, sail, boat, downhill ski, cross country ski, water ski, kayak, canoe, skate, sled, golf, shoot, rollerblade, horseback ride, garden, shop, dine, camp, and almost any other outdoor activity you can think of. I have high speed internet, movie theaters, decent shopping, good resturants, micro-breweries (plural), and I'm not far from a cool college town with sports, museums, theater and the other stuff you might expect. If you are bored in the rural area where I live it is your own damn fault.
Furthermore if I need access to a city and the things contained therein I can drive a relatively modest distance and have access to literally everything a city has to offer without having the burden of having to actually live with the noise, stench, pollution, crime, and claustrophobia. I'm not going to go to the museum or the s
My god, that interface is so painful, there's no way in hell I'd use it.
This iOS 7 "oversaturated colors on glaring white" GUI approach needs to die in a fire.
- Zav - Imagine a Beowulf cluster of insensitive clods...
1. Find a spot about to expire
2. Offer it for sale
3. Profit
Seriously, how do you ensure there really is a space and payment? Or that someone who doesn't like the service gets a bunch of people to offer 'spaces?'
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
Sounds like a challenge... preferably involving something contagious, with lasting consequences.
Like mumps or measles.
Then everyone and their family, friends, relatives, neighbors etc. can sue the company for damages.
How much does disfiguring scars or sterility go for these days?
You Europeans don't like open-borders immigration though, but the liberals here in the US keep telling us we should open our borders and provide free government services to anyone who wants them, and that we shouldn't discriminate based on education or skills like you Europeans do.
Those are pretty much the only places with "reasonably-good public transportation systems", and they only service a very small fraction of the country's population. Moreover, those systems actually really suck outside of the city centers and certain routes. For instance, NYC's subways system is pretty good--in Manhattan. There's a bunch of other boroughs in that city where it sucks. Staten Island has no subways at all, only some buses, and they suck. The Bronx has very poor public transit too, and so does Queens. Things aren't too hot on the New Jersey side either; there are some NJ Transit train routes that'll get you into Manhattan in a reasonable time, but if you don't live near one of those train stations, it's not that useful. There's also buses, but they're horribly slow, and frequently get stuck for (literally) hours at the Lincoln Tunnel.
This kind of app is doomed to fail... too many non-honest users required for this to work... could we declare it's over by corrupt data? When this is declared corrupt, corrupt input is deserved.
Whoosh!!!
Your username really says it all.
Massive cities are, by all measures, more efficient than suburban life or rural life.
"All measures"? Not even remotely true. Many or some measures I would agree with but not "all". Cities do have certain efficiencies but they aren't all positive. Cities concentrate some desirable things but also concentrate undesirable things too. Cities have more crime, more pollution, worse traffic, and of course more people. Cities are demonstrably less efficient in certain ways, particularly things related to plants animals and the benefits they provide like the oxygen you enjoy. Efficiency also depends on your lifestyle and what you are trying to get efficiency out of.
Trucking in and out food is orders of magnitude greener than producers sending out 1000 smaller trucks much farther
Where do you think the food comes from? I can and do get a huge portion of my food from local farms out here in the country where it is grown and I don't even have to drive anywhere special to get it. I have farmer's markets right on my daily commute and several farms as well. Hell, I have people who farm near me who supply your food and grow their own besides. Explain to me how your city is getting its food more efficiently than they are.
Wiring power to a 30 floor apartment building is much more efficient than stringing copper to an equal number of suburban homes.
At the cost of having to live in a 30 floor apartment building. I live in a 3000 square foot post and beam house with a huge amount of property and nearby parks (real parks). A shitty house anywhere close to NYC would cost twice as much and something comparable would cost 5-10X as much. An apartment might be thermodynamically efficient by some measures but are you really going to decide where you want to live based on that? If you want to get in a pissing match I can power my home with solar panels and/or wind if I want to and be net zero energy. Enjoy your boiler and cramped living space. [/teasing]
If you like city living that is cool but don't look down your nose at those who prefer a more rustic lifestyle.
Yes, that's it, ALL citizens of Europe are agreed on this topic, it's only in the US where people are divided about it.
moron.
Making the world a worse place, one awful new thing at a time.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
People pay more for things that are more efficient. A refrigerator that consumes less electricity will, all else held equal, command a higher price because it saves the consumer money. A home that has everything you need conveniently nearby also commands a higher price because it's more efficient to live there than to live, say, on the moon and having to do all of your shopping by rocket ship.
An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
No one says that. Find better sources.
What we should do is stop pursuing people who are already here and focus on the border.
The cost of removing people who are here illegally is huge, mind numbing large. It's a waste.
Then there is the issue of people dragged here as children. Deporting them is uncivilized and, frankly, just mean.
We should also have easy to get short term visas for people who work fields, since there aren't enough Americans willing to do it.
"and that we shouldn't discriminate based on education or skills like you Europeans do."
what does that even mean?
Again: Find better news sources.
I could go on about prereagan immigration for farm workers. If we could go back to that, it would be awesome. just don't think it's possible now.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Would not even need to 'park' there! Just plop your shopping cart / cardboard box home in the middle of the spot and refuse to move until someone gives you a $20. Sounds perfect! What could possibly go wrong?
The more people I meet, the better I like my dog.
Oooh, Slam poetry and obscure German board games!
I cannot contain my excitement.
Life's what you make of it. there's tons of things to do in small towns. It just isn't as organized.
"and that we shouldn't discriminate based on education or skills like you Europeans do."
what does that even mean?
Go look at the immigration laws for Canada or any western European country. They don't want you there unless you have something to contribute, and aren't going to take a job away from someone there. In short, highly-skilled tech workers have a fairly easy time getting in, and uneducated farm hands and landscapers don't. They also generally require you to learn to speak the national language (or one of them in multilingual countries like Canada or Switzerland) in short order.
The cost of removing people who are here illegally is huge, mind numbing large. It's a waste.
That's bullshit. All you have to do is make it very difficult for them to live here by denying them employment and they'll leave on their own.
Over in Denmark, if you're caught as an illegal immigrant, they actually make you pay for your own deportation. Why don't we do that?
Then there is the issue of people dragged here as children. Deporting them is uncivilized and, frankly, just mean.
Why is that? They're still illegal immigrants. Do you think European countries give them any special privileges? Do you know how many European countries have birthright citizenship? Zero. So getting there illegally and dropping a baby isn't going to help you over there either.
Again: Find better news sources.
It sounds like you need to find some better news sources. You might want to start with the actual governmental websites of various nations.
and the heating part, lots of old buildings have ancient inefficient boilers that pollute. the upper east side has some of the worst air quality. newer burb homes will have newer and efficient boilers
This may be a knock on the current state of NYC, but this is not a trait of all large cities. Those large buildings can be retrofitted and suburbs will eventually age.
San Franscisco is the 2nd most walkable city in America (after NYC). Only idiots drive here.
-- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
Whats this got to do with Science Fiction ?
Aw Hell, thread is off on a tangent here. Nazi. Hitler. Stalin.
Obviously they mean he's a brogrammer...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B...
Agreed that it depends on the person. Just like it takes you 30 minutes or so to get to the symphony or theater from your (presumably) suburban home, it will take a NYCer 30 minutes or so to get outside of the city to a place where you can go hiking, biking, camping, picking apples, etc. If it's important for you to do those things very often, then maybe you move to that area. If it's more important to live within easy walking/cycling distance to dozens of bars, clubs, fine dining, live music, events - then move to the city. I would also point out that the crime rate in NYC is at historic lows.
Disclaimer: I lived in NYC for 10 years and moved out to the rural mountains because I fall into the first group. I do miss being able to just decide to go out and do something loud and fun and party at 1AM on a Tuesday (closest thing to a "city" is about a 3 hour drive), but that's a small price to pay.
"really civilized"
I think you mean really population dense.
"You Europeans don't like open-borders immigration though"
The last time the US had an open-border was in 1874 prior to the page act. And you might want to look up what they did in 1965 and the situation before.
Europe is actually the new immigration continent. We accept more refugees per year than the US. Official data of 2012 : 1 million immigrants into the US, 1.7 million into Europe.
And we don't discriminate. Not on a large scale. (individual assholes excluded)
Acceptance of valid refugees isn't based on skills or education.
But thanks for speaking out of your butt. Thanks for proving what idiots republitards are.
SF used to have homeless people selling parking spaces. You'd see guys standing in empty parking spaces, waving you in, and expecting to be paid. That's been stopped; it's extortion.
So is this.
"They don't want you there unless you have something to contribute, and aren't going to take a job away from someone there."
Wrong. Refugees from war torn countries, etc are not held up to this standard.
"They also generally require you to learn to speak the national language (or one of them in multilingual countries like Canada or Switzerland) in short order."
Wrong again. You have the right (!) to learn the language. And it makes it easier to get a job. But there is no general law that it requires it.
"So getting there illegally and dropping a baby isn't going to help you over there either."
Wrong. It does.
signed, a better informed European.
PS : we have a higher influx of immigrants than the US.
"Zombie John Wayne is my copilot"
No, I got the joke. Christ, can't I take a topical side-discussion without being trying to argue against you?
So no Bus or Train has ever been in an accident that has caused fatalities? That, and there is something nice about taking my car instead of getting shoved up against a person who hasn't showered in a week and the sick lady coughing all over the place.
" it will take a NYCer 30 minutes or so to get outside of the city to a place where you can go hiking, biking, camping, picking apples, etc."
Sure it will. Without a car? on mass transit? I have been to NYC and it takes a lot longer than 30 minutes to go out of the city unless it is the middle of the night or the crack of dawn.
I could get a house for about the same that I paid for mine only 8 minutes from my office and only 10 minutes from downtown. I bought my home when I was working for a different company. Oh and that location I am talking about is about 5 minutes from a mountain biking trail, HPR launch site, and a Wholefoods.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
LA? Chicago? Dallas Fort Worth?
I think you will find the choice is probably pretty good. Some people do like NYC but a lot of people would hate it. Where I live I can get 90% of what you can get in NYC for 5% of the greif.
Clean air, clean water, light traffic, low housing costs, free parking and so one.
Plus no snow. and 9 to 10 months a year of good beach weather.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
You post made it look like you didn't get the OP's sarcasm at all.
"Refugee" doesn't equal "I'm poor and want to live in a rich country", it means you're coming from a war-torn country and will probably be killed if you don't leave. Random poor people from a 3rd-world country are not "refugees", otherwise why aren't you sending planes to bring all poor people worldwide into your countries as immigrants?
Oh and that location I am talking about is about 5 minutes from a mountain biking trail, HPR launch site, and a Wholefoods.
You're also a long way from lots of other things. That's the trade-off for living in a low-density area. If you want a lot of variety, you need an urban setting (or rather by the time you've got it, you've got enough economic activity that you will have a substantial city there very soon if there isn't one already). You can tell yourself that you don't want the other things offered by a city — it might even be true — but that doesn't change the fact that you're choosing to be without them.
"Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
Over in Denmark, if you're caught as an illegal immigrant, they actually make you pay for your own deportation. Why don't we do that?
Just a guess, but if they had any fucking money, they wouldn't be risking life and limb to come here and get a fucking job.
Without being needlessly antagonistic, that's your reading comprehension failure, not mine.
here's my sentiment
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPb-PN9F2Pc
fuck every one of those San Francisco bay area fagots.
The ones here in the US pay thousands of dollars to coyotes to bring them here.
" bastions of efficiency ... but ignoring those false hoods"
Citation please. not to shoot you down without providing sources, but for the sake of education. I've read many articles saying that "if you love nature, live in a city." if there's scholarly work that proves the opposite, i would like to read it.
Like what? 10 minutes to the Kravis Center. 20 to the airport. 20 to the beach. Good pizza, Mexican, thai, Vietnamese, Greek, and who knows what else? I have just started to explore the area.
I am near a city, just not NYC. There a lot of cities that are not the nightmares that are SF and NYC as far as cost of living and crowding. My wife's mother lived just outside Dallas. It was great because you could go to the store or a mall in 10 minutes and be in downtown in less than 30.
You can tell yourself that you do not want what not living in NYC or SF offers and you might even mean it but you are still choosing to be without them.
I like visiting NYC but I would not want to live their the trade off is just not worth it. It is just too crowded, too expensive, and too polluted for me.
Hey Donald Trump can live anywhere but he has a house in Palm Beach as well as NYC. I doubt he goes without much when he is here in Florida.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
This is so great! It's like people aren't all the same or something.
It's funny to see you guys argue over which place is better to live in, while both having the chance to live where they prefer thus making everyone happy.
It's so pointless yet so entertaining.
You're also a long way from lots of other things. That's the trade-off for living in a low-density area.
Yeah, "long way" is relative if you include the time dimension. I've lived in places from big cities to fairly rural areas. The thing about big cities is that all that "high-density" of activity means it takes a long time to get anywhere. I lived only few miles from the center of cultural activities, etc. in a big city, and it would take me basically an hour to get there by any reasonable method. I could walk 10-15 minutes to the subway station, wait 5 minutes for a train, spend 20-30 minutes on the subway (including changing trains generally), and then walk another 5-15 minutes to the event.
Or I could just walk there for 4 miles or whatever, and probably it would take about the same amount of time.
OR -- I could live 20 miles outside the city, and on the occasion when I want to go to a major arts event, I could drive into the city, probably get there in less time than I would have spent on public transport, and park in the garage next to the event site.
"But!" you say, "Why couldn't you park in the garage and drive from your place in the city?! Or take a cab?" Well, yeah, I could -- except my rent or mortgage in the city is 3 times what it would be 20 miles outside the city. So, I can afford the parking garage easily with all the extra cash I still have in my pocket.
If you want a lot of variety, you need an urban setting
Meh. It's somewhat illusory. Yeah, it's easier to walk around your house and have a variety of restaurants or coffee shops or whatever. But unless you're rich enough to live in the center of the downtown, you'll probably still have a significant commute to get to a lot major event venues.
Regardless, if you live in or near a small city, you generally have as much variety in restaurants and such within a 10-20 minute drive as you would within a 10-20 minute walk in the city. The difference is that the city forces you to walk or take a cab, because there's often no parking anywhere (or you could take a car and spend $20 for parking or 20 minutes driving around to find a spot).
Basically, distances are much smaller in the city. But the high density means you cover those distances much more slowly. If you factor in the time dimension, "distances" (as in how long it actually takes you to get to things) to a variety of things may be basically the same for a smaller city or suburb of a smaller city.
You can tell yourself that you don't want the other things offered by a city â" it might even be true â" but that doesn't change the fact that you're choosing to be without them.
Maybe. It's a trade-off. But having lived in both sorts of places, I can say that except for major events that only a MAJOR city would have, you can get roughly the same accessibility and "density" of variety (factoring in time) in a lot of places... not just major cities. If you're looking for the upper end of culture, dining, shops, etc., obviously you're not going to find that in a lesser town or city... but most people I know who live in big cities can't afford to continuously attend or shop or go to such places on a regular basis anyway. If you live in a small city, you could instead just drive the hour or two to the major city when you want those things... probably with the same frequency that most people in the big cities take advantage of them.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I like New York too, but everyone's preferences are valid. In a free housing market, every place is as good to live as every other place, when you factor in costs. If you genuinely prefer living in a cheaper place to living in a more expensive place, and would gladly pay more to live there, consider that a win.
Sorry, but if I 'rent' a 15' x 10' (or whatever) space to park my car for a 24 hour span, but I move my car away and some other car sits in that space for the duration - how the hell is the space-owner entitled to demand more $?
That's as stupid as a sandwich-shop owner insisting that if I gave a chunk of my sandwich to a homeless dude, I should pay him for another sandwich (which, frankly, a restaurant in Luxembourg tried to assert to me was reasonable - I'd paid for a pizza, but because my g/f ate a piece, they wanted to charge me for another pizza).
Which is equally as stupid as the idea that I can't resell a book, or dvd, or mp3 if I bought it. But I guess the lobbyists have arranged that privilege right? The question is, could they re-sell the congressmen they paid for?
Technical applications are essentially pulling the 'slack' out of the system, and allowing people to take advantage of things that they PAID FOR, but which in practical terms they couldn't really use and so ended up as profit in the seller's pocket.
-Styopa
Not sure about the legality of the transaction, but the execution of the transaction will be tough.
Just how are you going to get paid before you give up the spot? The seeker will have to double park (illegal) before paying, unless Monkey does the transaction by credit card transfer. Even still, when you're auctioning a spot, others will want it too, leading to nightmare traffic in the area.
For those that don't know the city, there are a lot of parking garages and the prices vary from 10-15 dollars an hour, so that'll be the limit. Also note that most houses don't have enough parking for the tenants so street parking is very common. New buildings for certain have good parking garages, but many of the city buildings and houses won't be scraped for years. Also, drilling a parking garage into the side of a hill of a seismically active area has it's own engineering/city construction code challenges.
The app may work, I don't know if it's illegal, but I don't like it, and it will increase the aggravation factor by an order of 10 on busy days.
That's my quarter.
"Who are you?" "No one of consequence." "I must know." "Get used to disappointment."
That's only because 'i kan reed' used double secret sarcasm in his own post to fool you.
Nope. I've lived in Chicago and found the classical music and literary scenes very disappointing compared to NYC.
Of course, not everyone in NYC is interested in those two things specifically, but the choice of whether to live there often comes down to an interest in some subculture or another better represented in that megalopolis than in other US cities.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Public transportation sucks, and that is my opinion of it, your opinion may differ. Just like our reasons for why we think that may differ.
I don't like public transportation because as someone else mentioned, you're crammed into small confines with tons of other people, who are sick, smell, rude, and/or thieves or in some places complete thugs and gang-bangers.
Most of the times I've taken BART to the city, there is little to no parking at the BART stations, so you spend 20-30 mins circling the parking lot to find a park, before you can catch your train. Once you do catch your train, there are no seats available, and it's standing room only with everyone arm-pit to arm-pit packed.
Once you get to the other side, unless the BART station is right next to where you are going, you still have a long walk, or multiple other public transportation switches to make, like the bus, or the trollies, or the MUNI trams. Once you get off these, you STILL have to walk to your destination, they just get you closer.
Unless you do it often, figuring out how to take 3 different flavors or transportation, where to switch between them, where they go, and on what schedule is extremely frustrating.
Lastly, you are on their schedule, your waiting for the bus at the bus stop, your waiting at the tram station for the correct tram to arrive, your waiting at the BART station for the correct train. Tons of waiting in between at each transfer, plus payment methods. If you are a frequent rider, then you might be able to get your passes all in order, but if you do it occasionally, or are from out of town, you are buying tickets and passes at each stop along the way as well which kills time. Add in all the stops they make along the way, and you don't save that much time, so I would count that out as a benefit.
All for what, to save a couple bucks? I prefer NOT to be THAT cultured when it comes to sitting next to other people I don't know and treated like cattle. Call me uncivilized, but I prefer to drive when I go to the city, but I must admit, that is not often.
Meh..this sound just like more of the old "It's not enough that I get what I want in life....YOU must affirm my choices by also wanting the same things...by force if necessary.."
Unless, of course, the cities massively subsidize the suburbs. Then all bets are off.
Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
Violates the public parking policy. Tech Bro has no right to sell the spots... He is going to Jail soon.. A lawsuit awaits him !!!
The nice thing is that we live in a time where I can get high quality digital recording of any classical work and get access to just about any book I want to read anywhere. Yes it is not the same as going to a live event. I feel that way about going to theater which I am lucky because we have the Kravis center nearby.
But that is the point. NYC and SF is not universally better than any other place.
I can get things in my location you can not in NYC. I can see Sandhill Cranes and tortoises in my yard. I can have a large garden in both my front and backyard. I have a workshop in my garage to build bookcases and work on my motorcycles. I can see hawks, eagles, and owls while walking my dog.
But I can also go the theater, get good vietnamese food, get good mexican food, and good pizza. I can shop at Macy's, Bloomingdales, and Costco and buy my food at Publix, Publix Greenwise, and if I really want to WholeFoods. I also don't have to pay for parking or hunt for a parking space. I can also go to the beach in November most years.
Everyplace has advantages for some people. For a lot of people NYC and especially SF have just too many downsides. I also feel that the concentration of tech venture capital is bad thing for the tech industry. It tends to cause inbreeding which decrease innovation.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
government's only practical response is to raise the price of parking to the point that turnover is so high that you can usually find a parking spot quickly
No: city governments should get into the auction game themselves. That would be the ultimate response. There should never be a fixed price. Demand for parking, and thus the value of parking spaces, varies wildly at different times of day. The simple fixed-rate parking meter, yes, is ham-fisted; it does a horrid job of managing the demand, to the detriment of both the city, and of people who really, really need to park. But there's no ham in an auction.
Some people would prefer to pay less, and park 9 blocks from their destination and walk the rest of the way. Some people wouldn't prefer that. Another great thing about auctioning parking spaces is, everyone gains an opportunity to fulfill their preferences in this matter.
And here's yet another great thing that could be implemented and bring even more flexibility to the system: auction winners could set an even higher price at which they'd be glad to give up the parking space they won. Similar to the "make me move" price on Zillow.com. (But different, because the Zillow feature is non-binding.)
That that is is that that that that is not is not.
They adjust the prices by $.25 every month.
That's not nearly enough, not nearly often enough.
The city should be auctioning its spaces itself. It would be quite reasonable for parking spaces to go for $20,000 right in front of the convention hall on the day the billionaire's convention is in town; while those same spaces cost $0.08 at 3 a.m. the next day.
That that is is that that that that is not is not.
This post really did not deserve to be downmodded.
It's not flamebait, and he's not trolling -- city life isn't for everyone. The original poster didn't insult people who prefer cities, he only stated he didn't understand the rationale behind it.
Unless you absolutely -worship- cities and find anyone who doesn't like the downsides morally repugnant, I'm not sure why you would mod this post down.