When you implement rent controls, there's very little incentive to build more housing. It's the type of policy that most economists agree is a bad idea and it's little surprise that it distorts the market and causes all manner of ill adverse side effects.
You honestly can't expect anyone sane to build new housing when laws mandate that it be a poor investment. At that point you end up with the only solution being government funded public housing projects, but those have a lot of stigma attached to them.
SF's Rent control only applies to buildings built after 1979 - 37 years ago.
Which emphasizes the point that rent control is detrimental to building more housing space.
Whoops sorry, had that backwards -- I meant it applies only to building built *before* 1979 -- any building built in the past 37 years is not subject to rent control.
I've just arrived at an AirBnb apartment for a 2 week stay. When booking the place I was warned not to mention that I was in an AirBnb place as the locals aren't too happy with it. So I have been thinking about such apartments this week, and it seems to be that the hotels are missing out on an opportunity for renting out complete apartments.
Isn't that pretty much what Extended Stay suites are? Studio, one, or two bedroom suites available for rent by the day, week, month or longer.
don't have to worry about strangers wandering in every day to clean the place and poke around my belongings.
When I've stayed for an extended stay suite hotel, they only offered full housekeeping once a week, and I'm sure you could tell them to skip that too if you really don't trust the housekeeping staff.
Leaving a door unlocked is plain dumb no matter where you live. You may know and trust your neighbors, but can you say the same about your neighbors guest or even family visiting?
If I trust my neighbor enough to leave my front door unlocked, then why wouldn't I trust him to vet his guests?
I've exchanged keys with my neighbors and trust them and their guests enough to not use those keys to come in and steal my stuff. They have the same trust in me.
When you implement rent controls, there's very little incentive to build more housing. It's the type of policy that most economists agree is a bad idea and it's little surprise that it distorts the market and causes all manner of ill adverse side effects.
You honestly can't expect anyone sane to build new housing when laws mandate that it be a poor investment. At that point you end up with the only solution being government funded public housing projects, but those have a lot of stigma attached to them.
SF's Rent control only applies to buildings built after 1979 - 37 years ago.
I never understood why people think networks like the Internet are supposed to be private. They weren't designed to be originally. In fact, the first networks were broadcast: every node "talked" to every other node. Networks are supposed to facilitate communications. They aren't designed to hide communications. In fact in a peer to peer network like the internet, every node is supposed to be able to talk to other nodes. I know a bunch of people are going to get angry at this but the fact is if you want secrecy, don't use a communication network like the Internet. I know it is hard to believe, but it is possible! I'll wait for all the blah, blah, blah, I hate you Aspie responses, but if you look at the history of networks in general, security was an afterthought that was tacked on top (poorly).
Few people think the internet is private, that's why they use encryption.
If someone wants your secrets badly enough that they'll backdoor your phone without you knowing it (and they have the resources to do so), then no communication is safe, not even a person-to-person conversation.
All data in the CareMonkey mobile apps for smartphones or tablets is stored in an encrypted format using SHA3 (512bit). An essential requirement is that if a device is lost/stolen or someone gains access to the data files on the device that they are not be able to access any personal data.
SHA3 is not an encryption algorithm, it's hash function (it's right there in the name, SHA= Secure Hash Algorithm).
If the FBI's argument for these cams is that there's no expectation of privacy in public, then I suppose the FBI wouldn't mind if a group of citizens go together and published a map of all of these cameras? If they can be seen by the public, then that's fine, right?
And likewise, if I choose to park outside of an FBI field office every day and publish license plates, and video of everyone going in and out, that wouldn't be a problem either, would it? It's a public street, so no one should expect any privacy.
Oooh, a library! Boy, you guys must be really tough, if you hacked the web site of a library!
My biggest fear right now is some massive and misguided response to the Florida shooting. ("We've got to strike back! Let's bomb somebody...") I actually really appreciate this story, just for the fact that it underscores how weak ISIS really is, and that alot of what they're doing is just a lot of bullshit bluster, in the desperate hope they can inspire someone else to do their dirty work for them.
If by Florida shooting you mean that little punk twerp Treyvon Martin, I say good. It's good for everybody else anytime some piece of shit thug nigger gets himself killed by acting like a thug nigger. The younger this happens to them the better - preferably before they reproduce.
Before you say "it's good", maybe just take a look around and see what "Florida Shooting" could be related to an article about ISIS. You don't have to look very far, just look at the previously posted Slashdot story:
No need for that fancy stuff since it wasn't mission critical data Must have been designed by Carnegie Mellon grads
RAID and distributed DB's are for HA, they are not a substitute for backups. Neither RAID nor a distributed DB will protect against corruption or accidental data loss - if someone deletes the wrong records, they'll be gone from both the primary and secondary database.
Any many people still think RAID-5 gives adequate protection against drive loss, which is no longer the case with modern large hard drives.
Did you not read the first sentence of the summary? How does your comment make any sense in the slightest?
Still makes sense -- instead of using a jamming device that jams US GPS, why don't they just selectively disable over that region (or turn selective availability back on to degrade accuracy)?
Now if they were jamming GLONASS or Galileo, then it would make more sense, but why jam something when you can just turn it off at the source?
A halfway decent bike is already grossly overpriced, often costing well over $1000. Electric bikes are even worse.
You don't have to spend $1000+ for a halfway decent bike. I paid $600 for my commute bike -- 5 years and about 10,000 miles later, I've put new wheels, new tires, a couple chains, brake pads, and front chainring and rear gear cluster into it, so maintenance cost around $500.
So, the bike cost me less than $20/month so far, but I don't see why it won't last me another 5+ years without any major maintenance, so monthly cost will continue to decrease.
You can, of course, spend much more, my "fun" road bike cost me $2500. It's much lighter than the commute bike and more "fun", but not something that I'd put a rack/panniers on or put fenders on to ride in the rain.
The day I can go up to 30 miles one way daily on a bike in a timely manner, is the day I start getting in shape.
Otherwise, I'll have to keep using my car.
I think you got that backwards -- "The day you can go up to 30 miles one way daily on a bike in a timely manner is when you'll be in shape". Driving your car is not likely to get you into shape. But I think you mean 30 miles *each* way, or you have a very unusual commute.
Should there be more bicycle-oriented infrastructure? Yes. However if you're saying that at the same time cyclists should be banned from roads that don't have a dedicated bicycle lane, then I have to vehemently disagree with you, that would completely ruin cycling for everyone, from the most minimal commuter, all the way up to pro-level road racers, and everyone in between.
I've been an active cycling advocate for over 20 years in several different states, regularly attending community meetings to promote cycling, and have never heard of an advocacy group that would reject dedicated cycling infrastructure because they think cyclists belong on the roads. (though I have seen some poor "dedicated" lanes rejected because they were more dangerous than shared lanes since the cyclists were exposed to cars at every intersection).
More commonly, safe cycling infrastructure is dismissed because it's too expensive (and often that's because it wasn't taken into account in the initial project design -- for example, adding a dedicated bike/pedestrian lane on a new bridge is a tiny portion of the bridge's cost if done during design, but is prohibitively expensive afterwards)
Not only that. The laws limit the speed to 20 mph max for electric. Worthless on flat roads when you can easily reach 25 mph. It prevents them from being used on the roads properly.
Why is a 20mph bike worthless on a road with a 25mph speed limit? I ride my (non-electric) bike on 25 mph roads on my way to work... I rarely go over 20mph yet my bike is still quite useful (and faster than driving since i can take some bike-only shortcuts).
No, we don't record your conversations. If you choose to turn on this feature, we'll only use your microphone to identify the things you're listening to or watching based on the music and TV matches we're able to identify. If this feature is turned on, it's only active when you're writing a status update.
They say that it's only things you're listening to or watching, but how can they tell the difference between a private conversation between my wife and I, and what I'm watching on TV?
I've had a similar experience with Google. Having a conversation and then start typing a search based on that conversation in Google and with just a few letters typed, one of the suggestions is 100% on topic for the conversation I was having. This is typically on my desktop and I'm not running any Google offline apps (just hitting web pages).
Google is even worse... they do mind reading. Often when I am only thinking of something and start typing it, autocomplete shows the exact thing I was thinking about! Get out of my head, Google! I can't even find a setting in Android to turn this mind reading feature off.
I already get "free" precheck about half the time I fly. If they can automatically qualify me for pre-check without making me pay $85 and visit a TSA office to enroll, why don't they just continue to do that? Though I don't see why I sometimes get free pre-check on an outbound flight but not on a returning flight, have I suddenly become a security risk in the 2 days since my outbound flight, or are they just trying to give me a taste of pre-check so I pay to enroll?
Slashdot Mirror
When you implement rent controls, there's very little incentive to build more housing. It's the type of policy that most economists agree is a bad idea and it's little surprise that it distorts the market and causes all manner of ill adverse side effects.
You honestly can't expect anyone sane to build new housing when laws mandate that it be a poor investment. At that point you end up with the only solution being government funded public housing projects, but those have a lot of stigma attached to them.
SF's Rent control only applies to buildings built after 1979 - 37 years ago.
Which emphasizes the point that rent control is detrimental to building more housing space.
Whoops sorry, had that backwards -- I meant it applies only to building built *before* 1979 -- any building built in the past 37 years is not subject to rent control.
I've just arrived at an AirBnb apartment for a 2 week stay. When booking the place I was warned not to mention that I was in an AirBnb place as the locals aren't too happy with it. So I have been thinking about such apartments this week, and it seems to be that the hotels are missing out on an opportunity for renting out complete apartments.
Isn't that pretty much what Extended Stay suites are? Studio, one, or two bedroom suites available for rent by the day, week, month or longer.
don't have to worry about strangers wandering in every day to clean the place and poke around my belongings.
When I've stayed for an extended stay suite hotel, they only offered full housekeeping once a week, and I'm sure you could tell them to skip that too if you really don't trust the housekeeping staff.
Leaving a door unlocked is plain dumb no matter where you live. You may know and trust your neighbors, but can you say the same about your neighbors guest or even family visiting?
If I trust my neighbor enough to leave my front door unlocked, then why wouldn't I trust him to vet his guests?
I've exchanged keys with my neighbors and trust them and their guests enough to not use those keys to come in and steal my stuff. They have the same trust in me.
When you implement rent controls, there's very little incentive to build more housing. It's the type of policy that most economists agree is a bad idea and it's little surprise that it distorts the market and causes all manner of ill adverse side effects.
You honestly can't expect anyone sane to build new housing when laws mandate that it be a poor investment. At that point you end up with the only solution being government funded public housing projects, but those have a lot of stigma attached to them.
SF's Rent control only applies to buildings built after 1979 - 37 years ago.
I never understood why people think networks like the Internet are supposed to be private. They weren't designed to be originally. In fact, the first networks were broadcast: every node "talked" to every other node. Networks are supposed to facilitate communications. They aren't designed to hide communications. In fact in a peer to peer network like the internet, every node is supposed to be able to talk to other nodes. I know a bunch of people are going to get angry at this but the fact is if you want secrecy, don't use a communication network like the Internet. I know it is hard to believe, but it is possible! I'll wait for all the blah, blah, blah, I hate you Aspie responses, but if you look at the history of networks in general, security was an afterthought that was tacked on top (poorly).
Few people think the internet is private, that's why they use encryption.
If someone wants your secrets badly enough that they'll backdoor your phone without you knowing it (and they have the resources to do so), then no communication is safe, not even a person-to-person conversation.
the financially responsible idiot.
Why does a financially responsible idiot have a smartphone at all? Why doesn't he have a basic flip-phone with no data plan?
But if your phone is in a bag, how can you know if it's an emergency or not?
Duh, you just look at your iWatch to see who is calling. What idiot would have a smartphone without a smartwatch?
From the caremonkey security page:
All data in the CareMonkey mobile apps for smartphones or tablets is stored in an encrypted format using SHA3 (512bit). An essential requirement is that if a device is lost/stolen or someone gains access to the data files on the device that they are not be able to access any personal data.
SHA3 is not an encryption algorithm, it's hash function (it's right there in the name, SHA= Secure Hash Algorithm).
If the FBI's argument for these cams is that there's no expectation of privacy in public, then I suppose the FBI wouldn't mind if a group of citizens go together and published a map of all of these cameras? If they can be seen by the public, then that's fine, right?
And likewise, if I choose to park outside of an FBI field office every day and publish license plates, and video of everyone going in and out, that wouldn't be a problem either, would it? It's a public street, so no one should expect any privacy.
Oooh, a library! Boy, you guys must be really tough, if you hacked the web site of a library!
My biggest fear right now is some massive and misguided response to the Florida shooting. ("We've got to strike back! Let's bomb somebody...") I actually really appreciate this story, just for the fact that it underscores how weak ISIS really is, and that alot of what they're doing is just a lot of bullshit bluster, in the desperate hope they can inspire someone else to do their dirty work for them.
If by Florida shooting you mean that little punk twerp Treyvon Martin, I say good. It's good for everybody else anytime some piece of shit thug nigger gets himself killed by acting like a thug nigger. The younger this happens to them the better - preferably before they reproduce.
Before you say "it's good", maybe just take a look around and see what "Florida Shooting" could be related to an article about ISIS. You don't have to look very far, just look at the previously posted Slashdot story:
https://yro.slashdot.org/story...
No need for that fancy stuff since it wasn't mission critical data
Must have been designed by Carnegie Mellon grads
RAID and distributed DB's are for HA, they are not a substitute for backups. Neither RAID nor a distributed DB will protect against corruption or accidental data loss - if someone deletes the wrong records, they'll be gone from both the primary and secondary database.
Any many people still think RAID-5 gives adequate protection against drive loss, which is no longer the case with modern large hard drives.
Then you're not hip. You're square.
You're welcome.
Don't tell me that I'm crazy
Don't tell me I'm nowhere
Take it from me
It's hip to be square
Am I missing something here? I've never heard of Twitch.
Yes, you're apparently missing the ability to do a simple Google search.
This may help you:
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=what+is+t...
(hint: click any of the 10 results on the first page)
Did you not read the first sentence of the summary? How does your comment make any sense in the slightest?
Still makes sense -- instead of using a jamming device that jams US GPS, why don't they just selectively disable over that region (or turn selective availability back on to degrade accuracy)?
Now if they were jamming GLONASS or Galileo, then it would make more sense, but why jam something when you can just turn it off at the source?
Tell that to the stack of traffic behind you, ass-hat.
The only traffic behind me in the bike lane is other bikes. If a car chooses to drive in the bike lane, he should drive at bike speed.
A halfway decent bike is already grossly overpriced, often costing well over $1000. Electric bikes are even worse.
You don't have to spend $1000+ for a halfway decent bike. I paid $600 for my commute bike -- 5 years and about 10,000 miles later, I've put new wheels, new tires, a couple chains, brake pads, and front chainring and rear gear cluster into it, so maintenance cost around $500.
So, the bike cost me less than $20/month so far, but I don't see why it won't last me another 5+ years without any major maintenance, so monthly cost will continue to decrease.
You can, of course, spend much more, my "fun" road bike cost me $2500. It's much lighter than the commute bike and more "fun", but not something that I'd put a rack/panniers on or put fenders on to ride in the rain.
Indeed.
The day I can go up to 30 miles one way daily on a bike in a timely manner, is the day I start getting in shape.
Otherwise, I'll have to keep using my car.
I think you got that backwards -- "The day you can go up to 30 miles one way daily on a bike in a timely manner is when you'll be in shape". Driving your car is not likely to get you into shape. But I think you mean 30 miles *each* way, or you have a very unusual commute.
Should there be more bicycle-oriented infrastructure? Yes.
However if you're saying that at the same time cyclists should be banned from roads that don't have a dedicated bicycle lane, then I have to vehemently disagree with you, that would completely ruin cycling for everyone, from the most minimal commuter, all the way up to pro-level road racers, and everyone in between.
I've been an active cycling advocate for over 20 years in several different states, regularly attending community meetings to promote cycling, and have never heard of an advocacy group that would reject dedicated cycling infrastructure because they think cyclists belong on the roads. (though I have seen some poor "dedicated" lanes rejected because they were more dangerous than shared lanes since the cyclists were exposed to cars at every intersection).
More commonly, safe cycling infrastructure is dismissed because it's too expensive (and often that's because it wasn't taken into account in the initial project design -- for example, adding a dedicated bike/pedestrian lane on a new bridge is a tiny portion of the bridge's cost if done during design, but is prohibitively expensive afterwards)
Not only that. The laws limit the speed to 20 mph max for electric. Worthless on flat roads when you can easily reach 25 mph. It prevents them from being used on the roads properly.
Why is a 20mph bike worthless on a road with a 25mph speed limit? I ride my (non-electric) bike on 25 mph roads on my way to work... I rarely go over 20mph yet my bike is still quite useful (and faster than driving since i can take some bike-only shortcuts).
Facebook describes this very 'feature' right here.
https://www.facebook.com/help/...
Well, kind of, but it seems misleading:
No, we don't record your conversations. If you choose to turn on this feature, we'll only use your microphone to identify the things you're listening to or watching based on the music and TV matches we're able to identify. If this feature is turned on, it's only active when you're writing a status update.
They say that it's only things you're listening to or watching, but how can they tell the difference between a private conversation between my wife and I, and what I'm watching on TV?
I've had a similar experience with Google. Having a conversation and then start typing a search based on that conversation in Google and with just a few letters typed, one of the suggestions is 100% on topic for the conversation I was having. This is typically on my desktop and I'm not running any Google offline apps (just hitting web pages).
Google is even worse... they do mind reading. Often when I am only thinking of something and start typing it, autocomplete shows the exact thing I was thinking about! Get out of my head, Google! I can't even find a setting in Android to turn this mind reading feature off.
That's your fault. The airlines here have said for more than a year now that you should arrive at the airport at least two hours early.
It's his fault for getting there two hours early when the airlines said to get there two hours early?
So you blame the TSA because you didn't get to the airport earlier enough?
More than two hours before the flight should be early enough.
An hour before the flight *should* be early enough. Even an hour is longer than it should be if you're not checking bags.
The airlines here have been recommending my getting to the airport three hours early so if you were late it was your own damn fault.
This. My Alaska Air ticket explicitly said to get to the airport three hours early. The people complaining didn't read the fine print.
Or maybe the people complaining think it's ludicrous that they have to get to the airport 3 hours early for a 2 hour flight.
I already get "free" precheck about half the time I fly. If they can automatically qualify me for pre-check without making me pay $85 and visit a TSA office to enroll, why don't they just continue to do that? Though I don't see why I sometimes get free pre-check on an outbound flight but not on a returning flight, have I suddenly become a security risk in the 2 days since my outbound flight, or are they just trying to give me a taste of pre-check so I pay to enroll?