Readit News logoReadit News
esoterica commented on I mapped almost every USA traffic death in the 21st century   roadway.report... · Posted by u/Bencarneiro
blackeyeblitzar · a year ago
> A surface street going from 35mph to 25mph is not going to add an hour of driving time unless you are driving 100 miles a day on non-highway surface streets, which literally nobody does.

I’ve seen streets go from 45mph to 25mph, lose driving lanes to bike or bus lanes, lose parking, etc. It makes things far worse than you think. What used to be a 20 minute drive will now be 35 minutes. Now consider the drive in both directions, time to find parking, and other trips you might make that day. It forces people to stay confined and not make as many trips because it simply isn’t possible to fit them in anymore. That is a loss of life quality.

> Why should pedestrians bear the human cost of higher car speeds when drivers are the ones benefitting from it?

They don’t have to and by and large they don’t bear any cost for it. You’re exaggerating things - the probability of a pedestrian dying is incredibly low. I walk as well and am not in fear of cars just like I’m not in fear of other unlikely events.

esoterica · a year ago
The quality of life improves for pedestrians, cyclists and transit riders when parking and car lanes are converted to bike and bus lanes. Drivers are not the only stakeholders who deserve consideration.

Many of the people who insist that there is no safety impact from high speed local roads nevertheless choose to raise their kids in suburban cul-de-sacs with minimal traffic and curvy roads with low speed limits. They want the right to subject other communities to speeding cars for their own convenience while protecting their own families from them.

esoterica commented on I mapped almost every USA traffic death in the 21st century   roadway.report... · Posted by u/Bencarneiro
blackeyeblitzar · a year ago
To me that sounds like a safetyist argument. Even if the number of deaths are high in total count, it may not matter when you consider the trade offs. For example if everyone spends an hour more in traffic each day - which is what the effect of “calming” has been in my experience - you’re causing an impact that is worse than the small number of deaths in my city. That delay and damage to our life quality matters, and needs to be weighed against the rare deaths.

Cars are very safe today and are getting much safer. Even basic cars come with many features to avoid accidents now. We will probably see deaths per mile driven go down on its own, without the need for malicious road design.

esoterica · a year ago
People with long commutes spend most of that time on highways, which are not affected by traffic calming measures. A surface street going from 35mph to 25mph is not going to add an hour of driving time unless you are driving 100 miles a day on non-highway surface streets, which literally nobody does. You are exaggerating the impact of traffic calming measures.

Cars are getting less safe for pedestrians and cyclists, not more safe. Why should pedestrians bear the human cost of higher car speeds when drivers are the ones benefitting from it? Easy to pretend the benefits of speeding outweigh the costs when the benefits accrue to you and the costs accrue to other people.

esoterica commented on Supreme Court overturns 40-year-old "Chevron deference" doctrine   axios.com/2024/06/28/supr... · Posted by u/wumeow
refurb · a year ago
> Devastating that expertise will no longer influence the application of law and policy.

How on earth do you come to that conclusion? Nothing stop Congress from leveraging experts in drafting laws.

This simply requires that interpretation of law be done in a clear transparent way (courts), rather than by a nameless, faceless, unelected bureacrat.

How can anyone say "no, I'd rather have some bureaucrat do it"?

esoterica · a year ago
Judges are also unelected bureaucrats, and they are less subject to democratic oversight since they have lifetime appointments vs agency heads who are appointed by the executive branch and can be effectively "voted out" if voters choose a different president who replaces them.
esoterica commented on Supreme Court overturns 40-year-old "Chevron deference" doctrine   axios.com/2024/06/28/supr... · Posted by u/wumeow
torstenvl · a year ago
Vesting unreviewable legislative authority in unelected bureaucrats specifically chosen because of their long and close ties to the industries they are meant to regulate is anathema to every tenet of democracy. Good riddance.
esoterica · a year ago
Removing Chevron deference moves authority from the administrative agencies to the courts, who are not only also unelected bureaucrats, they are more insulated from democratic forces since they have lifetime appointments. Agency heads are political appointments and change with every president.
esoterica commented on Supreme Court overturns 40-year-old "Chevron deference" doctrine   axios.com/2024/06/28/supr... · Posted by u/wumeow
GenerWork · a year ago
>Yes but people who have been listening have also been dreading this coming for years.

Why are they dreading this? I find it strange how so many people are upset that the Supreme Court is forcing Congress to do its job, which is pass laws.

esoterica · a year ago
Congress is broken and structurally incapable of passing laws under this level of political polarization because there are too many veto points (bicameral legislature, the filibuster, the presidential veto) for any law to get passed even if it's supported by the majority of legislators and the majority of voters.
esoterica commented on One dead as London-Singapore flight hit by turbulence   bbc.com/news/articles/c88... · Posted by u/yowmamasita
ryandrake · a year ago
I agree with this. The seatbelt light is as anachronistic as the no-smoking light. They should just keep it on at all times. People obviously are still incorrectly interpreting "seatbelt light off" as "I should take my seatbelt off now."
esoterica · a year ago
The seatbelt sign tells you whether or not you are allowed to get up and move around. Unlike the no-smoking light it has actual informational content.
esoterica commented on Tesla Q1 2024 Update [pdf]   digitalassets.tesla.com/t... · Posted by u/kgwgk
whalee · a year ago
The near 8x increase in compute capacity since March 2023 is the eyebrow raiser for me. My belief is that the vast majority of speculative value in Tesla has almost nothing to do with their hardware and everything to do with the potential of FSD.

If you believe the hypothesis that Americans will pay a huge premium (directly or indirectly by subsidizing the poor build quality) to decrease the mental load by 85% on their twice-daily 35 minute commute, then the company is in good shape.

On top of this, their data moat is enormous and their pipeline is mature. Other car companies seeking this level of autonomous fidelity will need to either race to start harvesting as much data as possible, or make a bet that this quantity will be unnecessary with future models.

Then again, if you don't buy the value-add promise of FSD hypothesis then this company is faltering hard. Cybertruck is flopping in sales (with life-threatening build issues as a bonus), the company is facing deteriorating public perception, the tightening economy makes the 'premium'/'apple' presentation less appealing, serious competitors recently entered the EV market, on and on.

esoterica · a year ago
Tesla is not the leader in self driving, they are pretty far behind both Cruise and Waymo, which have or used to have driverless vehicles legally operating on public roads. If you're betting on driverless tech why would you go with Tesla and not Google or GM?
esoterica commented on From a lorry driver to Ruby on rails developer at 38   writesoftwarewell.com/lor... · Posted by u/ksec
ok_dad · a year ago
I’ll buy that 400-500k a year is average for Facebook, Apple, Google, etc.

It’s absolutely NOT average for companies who aren’t the massive giants that those are. I’ve been in actual tech startups, not Uber for Clowns, and the best salary I’ve seen was an (admittedly very good) $170k for a senior dev position. That’s close to average when I talk to my friends and associates in tech in the valley and beyond.

esoterica · a year ago
Facebook, Apple and Google are very big companies which hire a lot of very well paid engineers. We're not talking about being an NFL quarterback or something where only a small handful of people will reach that level. Being a big tech engineer is probably the easiest and most achievable path to $500k/year on the planet.
esoterica commented on From a lorry driver to Ruby on rails developer at 38   writesoftwarewell.com/lor... · Posted by u/ksec
jorvi · a year ago
That’s 150-200k on the earning side. In most European countries this has a bunch of social security pay-in, pension pay-in, employer-side employee tax etc. already paid for via the employer. The “real” wage is often close to double, so 300k-400k vs 500k-700k, which doesn’t sound nearly as grim once you factor in the much better quality of life.
esoterica · a year ago
A pension is not worth 150k-200k a year in compensation. Also taxes are higher in most of Europe, even taking payroll taxes into account (I assume that's what you mean by social security pay in).
esoterica commented on Ask HN: Does it still matter to be in the Bay Area?    · Posted by u/b20000
lolinder · a year ago
> Yet it is undeniable that – just like being an actor in LA or an investment banker in New York

This is what I object to: the comparison to acting or investment banking tends to exaggerate the centralization of tech jobs.

If you want to be in a film and aren't in LA then you don't really want to be in a film, because a solid majority of the jobs are there. I imagine the same is true for investment banking and New York.

San Jose and San Francisco, on the other hand, represented ~180k of the nation's ~1650k software developers in 2023 [0]. That's ~10% of all US-based software developers and about 0.6% of all software developers in the world [1]. Not a tiny percentage, but nowhere close to Hollywood's dominance in film.

[0] https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes151252.htm

[1] https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-many-software-developers-...

esoterica · a year ago
Most programmers are $90k/year code monkeys. The $400k+/year jobs are very heavily concentrated in a small number of tech hubs, and mostly in the bay, and that’s the relevant statistic that should inform your decision making if you want to make that type of money.

u/esoterica

KarmaCake day950February 17, 2017View Original