A complete solution - the FreeBSD toaster
on
Mailing List Managers?
·
· Score: 3, Informative
If you go here you'll find a great recipe (including install scripts) for a FreeBSD-based solution that includes Qmail and EZMLM-idx, but also includes a webmail interface and wicked-cool support for virtual domains. The setup is supported by an active e-mail list and it's been rock-solid on my moderate-sized lists, as well as much larger lists used by others.
Probably more of a solution than you need, but it's a very good way to take a generic boxen and quickly turn it into a slam-dunk mail server and listserver.
The guy who developed it (Matt Simerson) is uber-conscious of security issues and a helluva nice guy to boot; he's put together an exceptionally tight package from a security standpoint. If nothing else, you may want to look at what he's got and do a modified or stripped-down install.
:::tossing his pittance of geek cred out the window...:::
OK, here in the real (i.e., married with non-geek friends) world, we have to hide this stuff. We do this because:
There is a direct correlation between the visible amount of free-range Cat-5 wiring and the frequency of spousal sex.
It's ok to have stuff lying about when you're tinkering with it (and there's always one deconstructed boxen lying around), but the stuff that's up and running needs to be protected from dust, pets and people with large feet who trip over things.
I pay too much for my mortgage to have the house look like my old dorm room.:)
Here are the mantras in our house:
KVM is your friend. You saw some of these photos -- a one-to-one computer/monitor ratio is just silly unless you're herding iMacs.
Bitchin' furniture often equals bitchin' rack space.We're in an old house and we have some antiques. We've found that a lot of old furniture (amoires, buffets, etc.) that can be picked up on the cheap does a great job of holding the equipment and keeping it out of sight. Remember: WAY back in the day (i.e., turn of the century), most rooms didn't have closets, so they were always thinking in terms of "where can I put this stuff?"
Spend a minute or two thinking about ergonomics, dammit. Nearly every photo on the original post is going to screw someone's back or wrists up.
The minute you own your own place, ditch the wires. OK, so you can't start running cable through the walls in your dorm or apartment. But once you actually OWN the walls, you sure can -- and life suddenly becomes a helluva lot more clutter-free. Wireless? Yeah, if you can live with the lower bandwidth.
... and while we're at it, postmodern project management. And marketing. And clients.
Great topic, and an important one as the field evolves. But much of commercial programming has become the equivalent of building carburators on an auto assembly line (or, perhaps in the case of OOP, putting carburators in engines).
Any thoughts on how a nascent postmodern programmer can spark revolution up the management chain?
Pardon my ignorance, but are there additional challenges on real-time encryption when wireless gets that fast?
I'm not thinking so much of a peer-to-peer or client/server setup where there's a networking handshake, but more along the lines of a broadcast data stream meant for everyone (or maybe just a few certain someones) to pick up.
Still in beta, but here's an honest site
on
Honest Job Sites?
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Grassisgreener.com has been a terrific resource for me. They use a spidering algorithm (ala Flipdog and others), but it seems to be particularly deep. When I last checked, they had several times the number of jobs listed as, say, Monster.com.
Disclaimer: I'm not associated with the company in any way.
Next on the Trinity Broadcast Network...
on
Today's Solar Flare
·
· Score: 1
"When God Lights His Farts!"
Inclined to count? A casino alternative...
on
MIT vs. Las Vegas
·
· Score: 1
I used to count on a semi-serious level (translation: Had a day job and needed that damned day job, but managed to make $10-20k a year gaming). A few years ago, several of us made the switch to video poker, and never looked back
The reason? In a regulated environment (i.e., Vegas, Atlantic City or any of the other major gaming centers), the laws stipulate that the machines have to be truly random -- and the take from them (and from other casino operations) is sufficiently large that it's been years since any casino tried to jimmy the chips controlling the RNG or other aspects of the machine.
"Bullshit!" you say. "That's just a version of slots, and slots are a loser's game!" Well, you'd be wrong on that count, sparky.
What you get with video poker are a couple of good things and a couple of bad things. If you choose correctly, the good outweighs the bad:
Positive games -- an obvious good. There are 100%+ games pretty easily found at the 25-cent level, and fewer (but they still exist) at the dollar level. By "positive," I mean that if you play every hand correctly for maximum return (not unlike basic strategy in blackjack, but a bit more complex), then you will make money over the long haul.
More throughput and generally better comps -- also good. Casinos love slot/video poker players because you can move more money through the machines faster than you can through a table game. For the average player and the average casino slot manager, that means losing your money faster. But if you're playing a positive game, you can run an immense amount of cash through in relative short order. A fast player at the 25-cent level can get his food and rooms comped AND make money -- albeit, not a fortune if you're playing at the quarter level.
It's volatile -- and this is bad. Because so much of the game's payout is tied up in a royal flush (which, if you're playing correctly, shows up about once every 42,000-43,000 hands), you can have nasty streaks. Basic rule of thumb: Sit down at a positive game with about 3x what the royal pays, and you'll ride out nearly any statistical blip. (Of course, if you're playing a negative-expectation game or playing a positive one poorly, you're screwed no matter how much money you have.
An example of Video Poker math:
In San Diego, there's a $1 NSUD (Not-So-Ugly Deuces) game that pays 99.75% with perfect play. However, once a week the casino runs a 3x cashback promotion that bumps the return up to 100.5% (and also lowers the volatility, as does any cashback offer).
700 hands per hour * 5 per hand * 100.5% = $17.50 per hour net. A somewhat chickenshit amount, to be sure, but it's an easy-to-find play and representative of what you can find with almost no research. Pros (and there are many) search for opportunities where the denominations are higher and the return is up past 101-102%.
Bob Dancer (the leading author and professional player in the VP world) recently wrote about how a four-day-a-week player who knew the right games and the right promotions could easily net $30k a year in the Denver casino market. Again, that's not great money -- but it would be tax-free (if you're playing quarters none of your jackpots would generate a W-2G form) and, playing that much, you'd never pay for a meal.
I know people have a misty-eyed love of blackjack, but there are other alternatives.
Say what you will about the paper (or I'll say it for you: It's a travesty), the fact remains that some legislators will read it, as will many "thought leaders" who write opeds, talk to legislators otherwise help the sheep decide what to think.
The think tank model -- a 501(c)3 that doesn't lobby directly but creates and sustains a campaign of education and publicity for an issue or issues -- works. And we should be doing more of it ourselves.
Is fighting Da Man in court (ala EFF/FSF) a Good Thing? Absolutely. But this sort of reasoned-looking, scholarly-looking stuff frames the debate in some circles -- and some of those circles have legislative power.
ADTI has been egregious in creating what is pretty obviously a hired-gun paper. But think tanks conduct "directed research" all the time. Some almost-think-tanks (like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce) will even turn their lobbyists loose on behalf of your issue if the donation is high enough.
The point? Yes, this is crap. But yes, we should be doing a non-crap version of it.
Red Hat, the folks behind UnitedLinux and IBM (which, according to a recent Smart Money article, is the player most likely to make a killing from Linux) should be approached by a start-up think tank devoted to studying the benefits of open-source software.
My guess: Given the right board, the right leadership and the right start-up plan, you'd get the attention of the Big Boys.
Would it be a $2 million/year think tank? No. But if you're smart about picking your fights and picking your publicity points, you could run the whole thing on $200k a year or less -- and take steps to beat these clowns at their own game.
When I was in high school (circa 1981), I borrowed an old, book-sized anthology of "Amateur Scientist" columns from a friend.
That sucker never saw my friend's house again -- the stuff you could make was incredible, and clearly from a time before anyone thought about suing authors for writing potentially injurous copy.
You could build (I kid you not):
your own X-ray machine (strong enough to kill mice!) out of old radio tubes;
your own rocket (5 feet high! Made of metal!) powered by oh-so-explosive powered zinc; and
even use an interestingly shaped chamber (can't remember the name, dammit!) to turn a stream of pressurized air into two streams -- one very chilled and one very hot -- using nothing more than the shape of the cylinder.
(The latter, now that I think of it, would make a great case-cooling system. Gotta go to the garage and find that book...
One of the problems when you start discussing toll roads (particularly in the U.S., but elsewhere as well) is that people call them "Lexus lanes," "lanes for the rich," etc.
In fact, nothing could be further from the truth.
Here's the situation today: We tax people (primarily through gas taxes, but in many parts of the region through additional sales taxes as well) for our transportation systems. This actually hits the poor doubly hard:
Gas and sales taxes are very regressive -- as a result, the poor pay a higher proportion of their income for a system they typically don't use as much; and
The money collected doesn't tend to help those who are taxed -- we take money from the urban core and use it to pour new concrete out in the suburbs.
Now, contrast that with tolls or user fees: Everyone still pays, but they only pay according to how much they use the highway system. This concept of "user fees" is more equitable (although, admittedly, less politically appealing) than hiding the cost of the road system underneath so many layers of tax that people don't understand the true cost of transportation. Getting people to see the true costs of transportation choices is something of a holy grail for many planners, since that (more than all the ride-free-for-a-week crap that passes for promotion) is one of the most effective ways to move motorists out of their cars and into more-efficient (at letast, they're more efficient if they're used) buses and trains.
There's also evidence that the private sector will step up to the plate and finance infrastructure improvements if the government will get out of the way and allow it. The 91 Express Lanes in Orange County, CA (disclaimer: I worked on this project) was the nation's first privately financed and fully automated toll road -- no toll booths, just windshield-mounted transponders that automatically debited your toll from a prepaid account. The backers of this road didn't build it for altruism -- they built it because it was a massive congestion headache that the state of California couldn't afford to fix and because the tolls would give them an attractive return on their investment.
Are they Lexus lanes? Not according to surveys of drivers. The people using the toll lanes matched the demographics and sociographics of the people riding in the adjacent (and congested) freeway.
"But what about funding transit and other non-road improvments" you say? Well, tolls make sense here, too. The goal of transit is to move more people more efficiently, as well as to give the poor, disabled and others who can't use a car a mobility option. Using tolls, you force those who use the road system the most to proportionately finance transit -- in effect, the people who are out on the highway causing the most congestion are forced to pay for more of the congestion solution. That's about as fair as it gets -- and it has the added benefit of encouraging the heavy users to think about switching to transit.
Tolls aren't perfect -- in Chicago, New Jersey and other long-time toll regions, the toll authorities have hired huge staffs and created a political constituency out of the people who work in the booths. But if you can create a system that removes many of the people from the process (through automatic tolling), then it's hard to argue that it's not a better system to finance transportation.
They can get a warrant and act as a third party because they have power-of-attorney agreements in place with each of the major software vendors that they represent.
Basically, if you're getting poked by the BSA, you're getting poked by Microsoft/Adobe/whoever from the point of view of the courts.
Chances are this is political grandstanding -- there's never been a local elected official who didn't envision themselves as someday being President of the United States, so they tend to want to show They Doing Something About The Problem at every turn.
The 45-day period gives the city attorney and city manager time to review case precedent and figure out what they can do. And what they may do (to show they're Doing Something) could include:
Impact fees for the business owner (it takes more cops to look after gaming-crazed kids!). These might be tied to the business-licensing process.
Mandatory content filtering ("Didja know they can get pr0n on them there Ninternet screens?!?")
Zoning changes (no Net cafes near schools, etc.)
This might be about genuine concern, but the PR guy in me says this is more about making a splash in the paper and taking a moment in the resulting flap to figure out a way to squeeze more municipal revenue from a small business.
Reducing market availability means that onlypaying, corporate customers will take a hit on access to the product -- it doesn't stop any Asian university student with a P2P app from burning an ISO to CD. Nor will it then stop a shop owner (who may not have a T3, but who can probably afford a couple of CD burners) from continuing to distribute pirated product.
Net reduction in piracy: Marginal. Net hit to legitimate product sales in the fastest growing market in the world: huge.
Is it just me, or does this smack of a trial baloon dreamed up by marketing without a lot of forethought? Honestly, if I were an investor I'd unload the stock if it looked like they were actually going to do what they're talking about.
It sounds as if upper management has started drinking the BSA kool-aid and believe that every pirated copy represents a lost sale. Silly.
If you're interested in Lindows, MS probably views you as a likely software pirate. After all, you're one of The Enlightened (i.e., you understand OSS) and yet, inexplicably, you still want to be able to run Windows software. Rightly or wrongly, the suits in Redmond probably assume you want your Windows the way you want your OSS: Free (as in beer).
I wonder if the BSA sends out e-mails as well as those charming little letters?
My building is owned by a graphic design shop that has a full T-1 (!) running into a very small building. I just negotiated access (insane -- no limits on bandwidth or ports AND no logging!) into my rent.
Oh, and they pay all the friggin' utilities, too! Life is good.
Might be a liability issue on their end. Although the costs to them aren't any different, their ability to chase you down for nonperformance may be easier
A corporation gets recommended to small businesses as a way to avoid having all of your personal possessions on the line in the event of a dispute. However, the flip side of that is that being a corporation gives them a more rigid framework to come after you (or, rather, your assets) in some instances.
KDE front-end for hyperspace navigation: In alpha release.
O'Reilly's "The Force In A Nutshell": Delayed.
PHP/MySQL admin interface for Death Star: Again, no dice.
And you people still wonder why the Empire runs on Microsoft?!?
Surprisingly narrow points of view
on
This is IT?
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I guess I'm surprised at the overabundance of is-this-all-it-is and boy-it's-gonna-fail posts. Is it the personal Jetsons-style flying saucer we've all been promised since childhood? No. But it is potentially disruptive technology.
(Bias alert: I work with urban planners and transportation engineers, so my own viewpoint is likely skewed as hell, just in a different direction.)
Disruptive elements worth watching:
Although it might be a macroeconomic edge for any urban area that adopts it, the Segway will really shine in fast-growing, high-density communities in developing nations. Other posts have mentioned it, but the point bears repeating: This is a no-brainer in the high-density cities of the developing world. No, it won't let farmers care for their fields faster and, no, it's not going to do a thing to eliminate the suburban-to-urban commute... but it will reduce infrastructure needs and congestion -- both of which are big-ticket drains on a city's economy.
Assuming it gets the safety nod, planners and elected city officials are going to love this thing. The former group is pretty monolithic its desire to get people to make "mode changes" (translation: they want us out of the car and on the train/bus/Segway), and the latter are spending billions of dollars across the country to lure people back downtown because they believe density = lower overall cost of services = good. (And yes, luring people back downtown also equates to political power.) I don't know if Steve Jobs is right about cities naturally springing up around this technology, but it's a pretty short hop to think that some cities might dramatically restrict personal auto use in a downtown core if these caught on in a big way.
The opportunity and use costs upset the existing paradigm. Getting around in a major U.S. city means you have your own car, you hoof it or you use some form of transit -- and, until now, the negatives of fixed-route transit or ridesharing (inflexible!) tended to balance against variable-route solutions such as cabs (pricey!), walking (slow!). The result: People, quite rationally, tend to prefer a personal vehicle for most trips. But now there's another option -- one that may have lower buy-in and use costs.
It will never take the place of cars completely or even mostly, but in cities like Chicago (which is experiencing a huge uptick in downtown residential development), this could be a way to dramatically reduce the number of cars on the street and increase the rate of residential urbanization.
Honestly, I never thought a pro-auto, anti-transit guy like me would ever see anything like this.
First case of poor infrastructure planning...
on
XML for Ancients
·
· Score: 5, Funny
Slashdot Mirror
Probably more of a solution than you need, but it's a very good way to take a generic boxen and quickly turn it into a slam-dunk mail server and listserver.
The guy who developed it (Matt Simerson) is uber-conscious of security issues and a helluva nice guy to boot; he's put together an exceptionally tight package from a security standpoint. If nothing else, you may want to look at what he's got and do a modified or stripped-down install.
...of individual liberties being trashed?
OK, here in the real (i.e., married with non-geek friends) world, we have to hide this stuff. We do this because:
Here are the mantras in our house:
You know damned well what happens: Scottie swims by in a (plus-sized) wetsuit and yells "Captain! There be whales here!!"
... to see thousands of web-porn banners screaming "see Dodecahedrons in hot back-stage action now!!!"
Great topic, and an important one as the field evolves. But much of commercial programming has become the equivalent of building carburators on an auto assembly line (or, perhaps in the case of OOP, putting carburators in engines).
Any thoughts on how a nascent postmodern programmer can spark revolution up the management chain?
I'm not thinking so much of a peer-to-peer or client/server setup where there's a networking handshake, but more along the lines of a broadcast data stream meant for everyone (or maybe just a few certain someones) to pick up.
Disclaimer: I'm not associated with the company in any way.
"When God Lights His Farts!"
The reason? In a regulated environment (i.e., Vegas, Atlantic City or any of the other major gaming centers), the laws stipulate that the machines have to be truly random -- and the take from them (and from other casino operations) is sufficiently large that it's been years since any casino tried to jimmy the chips controlling the RNG or other aspects of the machine.
"Bullshit!" you say. "That's just a version of slots, and slots are a loser's game!" Well, you'd be wrong on that count, sparky.
What you get with video poker are a couple of good things and a couple of bad things. If you choose correctly, the good outweighs the bad:
An example of Video Poker math:
In San Diego, there's a $1 NSUD (Not-So-Ugly Deuces) game that pays 99.75% with perfect play. However, once a week the casino runs a 3x cashback promotion that bumps the return up to 100.5% (and also lowers the volatility, as does any cashback offer).
700 hands per hour * 5 per hand * 100.5% = $17.50 per hour net. A somewhat chickenshit amount, to be sure, but it's an easy-to-find play and representative of what you can find with almost no research. Pros (and there are many) search for opportunities where the denominations are higher and the return is up past 101-102%.
Bob Dancer (the leading author and professional player in the VP world) recently wrote about how a four-day-a-week player who knew the right games and the right promotions could easily net $30k a year in the Denver casino market. Again, that's not great money -- but it would be tax-free (if you're playing quarters none of your jackpots would generate a W-2G form) and, playing that much, you'd never pay for a meal.
I know people have a misty-eyed love of blackjack, but there are other alternatives.
Say what you will about the paper (or I'll say it for you: It's a travesty), the fact remains that some legislators will read it, as will many "thought leaders" who write opeds, talk to legislators otherwise help the sheep decide what to think.
The think tank model -- a 501(c)3 that doesn't lobby directly but creates and sustains a campaign of education and publicity for an issue or issues -- works. And we should be doing more of it ourselves.
Is fighting Da Man in court (ala EFF/FSF) a Good Thing? Absolutely. But this sort of reasoned-looking, scholarly-looking stuff frames the debate in some circles -- and some of those circles have legislative power.
ADTI has been egregious in creating what is pretty obviously a hired-gun paper. But think tanks conduct "directed research" all the time. Some almost-think-tanks (like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce) will even turn their lobbyists loose on behalf of your issue if the donation is high enough.
The point? Yes, this is crap. But yes, we should be doing a non-crap version of it.
Red Hat, the folks behind UnitedLinux and IBM (which, according to a recent Smart Money article, is the player most likely to make a killing from Linux) should be approached by a start-up think tank devoted to studying the benefits of open-source software.
My guess: Given the right board, the right leadership and the right start-up plan, you'd get the attention of the Big Boys.
Would it be a $2 million/year think tank? No. But if you're smart about picking your fights and picking your publicity points, you could run the whole thing on $200k a year or less -- and take steps to beat these clowns at their own game.
{former ThinkTankGuy mode: off}
That sucker never saw my friend's house again -- the stuff you could make was incredible, and clearly from a time before anyone thought about suing authors for writing potentially injurous copy.
You could build (I kid you not):
(The latter, now that I think of it, would make a great case-cooling system. Gotta go to the garage and find that book...
In fact, nothing could be further from the truth.
Here's the situation today: We tax people (primarily through gas taxes, but in many parts of the region through additional sales taxes as well) for our transportation systems. This actually hits the poor doubly hard:
Now, contrast that with tolls or user fees: Everyone still pays, but they only pay according to how much they use the highway system . This concept of "user fees" is more equitable (although, admittedly, less politically appealing) than hiding the cost of the road system underneath so many layers of tax that people don't understand the true cost of transportation. Getting people to see the true costs of transportation choices is something of a holy grail for many planners, since that (more than all the ride-free-for-a-week crap that passes for promotion) is one of the most effective ways to move motorists out of their cars and into more-efficient (at letast, they're more efficient if they're used) buses and trains.
There's also evidence that the private sector will step up to the plate and finance infrastructure improvements if the government will get out of the way and allow it. The 91 Express Lanes in Orange County, CA (disclaimer: I worked on this project) was the nation's first privately financed and fully automated toll road -- no toll booths, just windshield-mounted transponders that automatically debited your toll from a prepaid account. The backers of this road didn't build it for altruism -- they built it because it was a massive congestion headache that the state of California couldn't afford to fix and because the tolls would give them an attractive return on their investment.
Are they Lexus lanes? Not according to surveys of drivers. The people using the toll lanes matched the demographics and sociographics of the people riding in the adjacent (and congested) freeway.
"But what about funding transit and other non-road improvments" you say? Well, tolls make sense here, too. The goal of transit is to move more people more efficiently, as well as to give the poor, disabled and others who can't use a car a mobility option. Using tolls, you force those who use the road system the most to proportionately finance transit -- in effect, the people who are out on the highway causing the most congestion are forced to pay for more of the congestion solution. That's about as fair as it gets -- and it has the added benefit of encouraging the heavy users to think about switching to transit.
Tolls aren't perfect -- in Chicago, New Jersey and other long-time toll regions, the toll authorities have hired huge staffs and created a political constituency out of the people who work in the booths. But if you can create a system that removes many of the people from the process (through automatic tolling), then it's hard to argue that it's not a better system to finance transportation.
Basically, if you're getting poked by the BSA, you're getting poked by Microsoft/Adobe/whoever from the point of view of the courts.
The 45-day period gives the city attorney and city manager time to review case precedent and figure out what they can do. And what they may do (to show they're Doing Something) could include:
- Impact fees for the business owner (it takes more cops to look after gaming-crazed kids!). These might be tied to the business-licensing process.
- Mandatory content filtering ("Didja know they can get pr0n on them there Ninternet screens?!?")
- Zoning changes (no Net cafes near schools, etc.)
This might be about genuine concern, but the PR guy in me says this is more about making a splash in the paper and taking a moment in the resulting flap to figure out a way to squeeze more municipal revenue from a small business.Net reduction in piracy: Marginal. Net hit to legitimate product sales in the fastest growing market in the world: huge.
Is it just me, or does this smack of a trial baloon dreamed up by marketing without a lot of forethought? Honestly, if I were an investor I'd unload the stock if it looked like they were actually going to do what they're talking about.
It sounds as if upper management has started drinking the BSA kool-aid and believe that every pirated copy represents a lost sale. Silly.
I wonder if the BSA sends out e-mails as well as those charming little letters?
Oh, and they pay all the friggin' utilities, too! Life is good.
A corporation gets recommended to small businesses as a way to avoid having all of your personal possessions on the line in the event of a dispute. However, the flip side of that is that being a corporation gives them a more rigid framework to come after you (or, rather, your assets) in some instances.
Checking Sourceforge...
GNU lightsaber: Nope.
KDE front-end for hyperspace navigation: In alpha release.
O'Reilly's "The Force In A Nutshell": Delayed.
PHP/MySQL admin interface for Death Star: Again, no dice.
And you people still wonder why the Empire runs on Microsoft?!?
(Bias alert: I work with urban planners and transportation engineers, so my own viewpoint is likely skewed as hell, just in a different direction.)
Disruptive elements worth watching:
- Although it might be a macroeconomic edge for any urban area that adopts it, the Segway will really shine in fast-growing, high-density communities in developing nations. Other posts have mentioned it, but the point bears repeating: This is a no-brainer in the high-density cities of the developing world. No, it won't let farmers care for their fields faster and, no, it's not going to do a thing to eliminate the suburban-to-urban commute... but it will reduce infrastructure needs and congestion -- both of which are big-ticket drains on a city's economy.
- Assuming it gets the safety nod, planners and elected city officials are going to love this thing. The former group is pretty monolithic its desire to get people to make "mode changes" (translation: they want us out of the car and on the train/bus/Segway), and the latter are spending billions of dollars across the country to lure people back downtown because they believe density = lower overall cost of services = good. (And yes, luring people back downtown also equates to political power.) I don't know if Steve Jobs is right about cities naturally springing up around this technology, but it's a pretty short hop to think that some cities might dramatically restrict personal auto use in a downtown core if these caught on in a big way.
- The opportunity and use costs upset the existing paradigm. Getting around in a major U.S. city means you have your own car, you hoof it or you use some form of transit -- and, until now, the negatives of fixed-route transit or ridesharing (inflexible!) tended to balance against variable-route solutions such as cabs (pricey!), walking (slow!). The result: People, quite rationally, tend to prefer a personal vehicle for most trips. But now there's another option -- one that may have lower buy-in and use costs.
It will never take the place of cars completely or even mostly, but in cities like Chicago (which is experiencing a huge uptick in downtown residential development), this could be a way to dramatically reduce the number of cars on the street and increase the rate of residential urbanization.Honestly, I never thought a pro-auto, anti-transit guy like me would ever see anything like this.
-- William "Scorpion King" Gates
And (gasp!) a female of the species. On slashdot. Will wonders never cease?