I’m custard cream till I die. Bourbons are the duller biscuit. Naturally, as a minor and inconsequential personal preference, I will fight to the death all who disagree.
And that’s why the American language is so strange.
I think one day in history the dictionary everyone used got coffee on it and the words had no definitions so they had to assign them to whatever they thought was right. Sadly they were wrong.
No no no. We FIXED them. Imagine being br*tish. Putting random “u”s in words. ColOur hOnoUr mOuLd. Imagine having a whole letter that only the 1%ers can even pronounce (its “t” pronounced like “s” but with a burst of air instead of a stream of air, and more pressure from the tongue onto the hard palate). We turned linguistic drift into linguistic power-slide.
Any time i hear a br*tish “person” talking, regardless of location or occasion, i rev my Ford f-450 supermax lifted truck (from which i removed the muffler) as hard as i can. This produces three strictly beneficial effects:
1 i can no longer hear the br*t “talking” 2 all of the smoke blocks sight of who is talking 3 the beautiful aroma that comes from the powerful black smoke reminds me of the most important things in life freedom, privatized healthcare, and tea in the ocean.
Actually most of our words are British words but Britain changed there meaning take soccer thats what the English used to call it because of the long socks the players wore Britain lost the memo but America remembered
Mostly tasteless? You need to try a better biscuit. Also, while that biscuits and gravy thing is true, they’re more often either on the side or cut in half with bacon and eggs or something in between the halves. It’s not something you want to eat every day, but once every few months on a Saturday morning it’s incredible.
I’m not sure that person has ever actually had a biscuit. I’ve never had a “spongey” biscuit. They are nothing like muffins either, which are closer to cake.
Where I’m from we serve them with a sausage patty in between the halves, and gravy on top. No one eats just a plain biscuit by itself… And they’re supposed to be fluffy and moist, not ‘crumby.’ What was described in the original comment is exactly what a plain, stale biscuit tastes like. That’s like an American taking a cold can of chili, dumping it on a slice of bread, and talking about how terrible beans on toast is…
Except the “gravy” is a greasy roux with bits of sausage meat in it. I think the biscuits are basically savoury scones. I’m not judging, the whole dish sounds fairly tasty and like the kind of thing a Northerner or Scotsman might invent.
Someone really needs to start making actual bourbon biscuits.
Like, yeah, they’re the best and all that. But, what if I need that bit of something to get me through the day? I can’t have a drink at 9 am because it’s frowned upon. But a biscuit? Yeah, that’s calm.
have half dozen various types. no need to delete. fedi-wide accounts are still a wish. name them the same and carry on. can set a redirect on mastodon. not sure lemmy
Technically, a DDoS can happen naturally if enough people are trying to use it at the same time. I’ve seen it happen to other, larger websites before. And lemmy.world definitely doesn’t have the infrastructure of some of those larger websites.
His story is amazing. Radicalized by the equivalent of Japan’s alt right, then when he realized that’s who exactly grifted his mother to give away the family wealth, turned his attention to that.
So, he fell for the alt-right bullshit, then later realized they were the grifters and scammers, not the filthy gaijin? That culminating in the assassination of Shinzo Abe sounds straight out of a revenge movie
I can’t find the article that mentioned his shift in political views, but he was a hardcore alt-right type before realizing that’s who swindled his mother.
One thing that does change depending on when the article was written is Abe’s connection with the church and the church’s connections to the Japanese and South Korean governments. Police withheld certain details until after the elections and approval ratings for the party dropped after. Generally, people aren’t too happy with that and there was even push back about the government paying for Abe’s funeral.
This kind of gatekeeping and elitism is bad for Lemmy and for FOSS.
It makes this community a less welcoming place and leaves new folks with a bad first impression. Much better to be welcoming and let people learn/see the benefits of FOSS at their own pace.
100% agree. Going “haha, aren’t I COOL for NOT using this one popular app or software!?” contributes absolutely nothing and actively makes the community uninviting. I’m all for FOSS, but if a closed-source app is better than the FOSS options, I ain’t gonna knock on anybody for using it.
Also why even use an app outside of accessibility reasons? Been using Kbin on a mobile browser and it’s been a pretty good experience.
I had to leave the Linux memes community because I swear nearly every post was shitting on Windows. Yes, I get it. Windows isn’t all that great. But, much like Ios, it just works for what I need. And I haven’t had any issues that weren’t ny fault with it.
If the game I play most, and the number one reason why i go on my pc, works on Windows, but won’t work on Linux. Which OS is better for me?
I thought all this software war crap era was over. That was shit I cared about when I was 14 or something. Just let it herself use what they want and explain the benefits of alternatives, only if they care.
I use Linux as my daily driver, yet I 100% believe Linux is overrated. It’s great if you’re willing to put in the work to get it working well, or maybe if you have someone else to do all your tech support for you, but it’s just not a good option for the majority of people.
I hate when people keep trying to push it on Windows users, especially when they go on about how “easy” it is. It’s not. And doing that will get people to try it out with high expectations and then get disappointed when they try it out and that’s not the case.
I honestly feel like people who say this stuff either haven’t tried Linux since 2008 or went straight to Arch.
I use Manjaro as my daily driver and I never need to fix the system. It really does just work, and these a bunch of disyros out there that do.
The only thing you might find terrible is trying to run windows programs on Linux, to which I say: dual boot! Even with all the progress Proton, Lutris etc. have made, it’s still way easier to just boot into windows on the occasion you want to play games or whatever.
I switched to Linux last year, and I used Linux Mint, which people say is the easiest, and then KDE Neon which I’m still using now, which is definitely way better than Linux Mint but it’s still not easy. I’m fine with it, and I personally prefer it to Windows, but I could never imagine my parents or my friends trying to use it without help.
I’d given up on lemmy because every so I had tried was unfinished and unpolished. I tried sync and finally felt like the user experience wasn’t getting in the way of content.
I’d love to support foss, if a genuinely comparable experience existed.
I’m glad to say that sync has revived my interest in lemmy.
You should check out Thunder, even if you gave it a try at some point - it’s super polished and it’s gotten even better week after week. In my opinion it has the best compact mode of all the lemmy clients, as long as you don’t mind swipe actions!
Not OP, but I’ve tried thunder. It’s OK. Sync is light years above all other clients I’ve tried. (same with reddit as well) swipe actions? Sync is the king of swipe actions.
I was using Thunder last week until Sync’s open beta got approved and the User Experience and the interface of Thunder is nowhere near Sync. It’s a night and day difference, and a difference that would have made me use Lemmy less and less.
Thunder is like a month old - it’s still growing and will continue to improve with the community’s help :) if you think anything could be improved, definitely shout it out on the GitHub page!
I understand that it’s new, and it is definitely the best FOSS Lemmy app out of the dozens that I used. But it has a very long way to go to achieve the same level of User Experience that Sync has. It’s not even close and I don’t think anything bar a major UI/UX rehaul could fix that.
Don’t forget the community’s reaction to comments like yours, why down vote him if he’s stating the obvious? FOSS projects often focus so much on technical features because everyone wants to flex their code-fu, but nobody gives enough time to UI/UX. Just look at pretty much every Lemmy web frontend, fugly webpages with early 2000s look-and-feel, usually slow and/or buggy, and with little to no user feedback.
Or I click a link to story about a cat stuck in a tree and it takes me to small, local newspaper I’ve never heard of called “The Sawfly Gazette - serving South Western Maine since 1975!”, then it immediately tells me I’ve hit my “article limit” and must subscribe for $14.95.
Fully agree with it, but they’re still extremely popular, and people will gladly keep handing over their money.
For me, I say “Ok” to them wanting us to get used to not owning our content - followed with “Then I’ll pay rental prices. Which means I’m not buying at $60+ dollars, if all I get to do is rent it then I’ll pay <$15 going forward.”
I once heard of an experiment in economics that offers insight into this.
Say you have 100 people. You give each of them one of two choices:
A : you get $40 unconditionally B: you get $70 - n, where n is the number of people who choose B
You end up getting, on average across experiments, n = 30.
If you move the numbers around (i.e, the $40 and the $70), you keep getting, on average, a number of people choosing B so that B pays out the same as A.
I think the interpretation is that people can be categorized by the amount of risk they’re willing to take. If you make B less risky, you’ll get a new category of people. If you make it more risky, you’ll lose categories.
Applied to traffic, opening up a new lane brings in new categories of people who are willing to risk the traffic.
Or something. Sorry I don’t remember it better and am too lazy to look it up. Pretty pretty cool though.
As a road widening project is completed, traffic is alleviated for a short amount of time. Then as time passes word spreads, or more people move to the city, or kids get older and get their driver’s licences. More and more people know this widened road is the fastest route, so more people take it, thus undoing the improvement. Then the cycle starts again - either with the same road being widened again, or another one a block over, on and on until the world is covered in asphalt.
The solution is to make alternative transit more appealing than cars. Bikes and public transit already have significant financial benefits, but lack infrastructure to make it more viable in North America. Busses get stuck in traffic, bikes are forced to share lane space with cars or sidewalks with pedestrians.
How is alternative transit the solution? Cities that have public transportation still have traffic jams.
There was an English traffic engineer that predicted that avg speed in central London will always be like 9mph. No matter how many lanes or public transit options you add. If there is no traffic, people will take cars until traffic jams are unbearable to give up. Then the system finds equilibrium.
The key is public transit that doesn’t suck. For the last 100 years the car and oil/gas industries have spent billions of dollars undermining public transit.
Dedicated transit lanes, subways, light rail, protected bike lanes all make cars less appealing to those that want to use them.
Yeah, one of the best examples of this is the Vienna public transit network. About 1000 vehicles (bus, tram, light rail, subway) in service at rush hour, a daily total distance of over 200000km traveled, more year-long ticket owners than car owners in the city, and about 2 million “travels” per day, which is about 30% of all traveling done over the city (including pedestrian and bike traffic)
If that traffic would be routed only by car, the city would be a giant parking space; to compare, one subway train carries about 900 people in rush hour, which replaces 790 cars (avg 1,14 persons per car here). the subway interval in the rush hour is about 4 minutes. i live at one of the subway final destinations, which is on one of the far ends of the city - and i can be at the other side of town in about 25 minutes.
And constructing and running a public transit network is a pretty nice boost to the local economy, creates a whole lot of jobs. sounds like something a lot of us cities could make use of.
Mixed traffic works here, it allows mobility for all social classes (yearlong tickets cost 365€, so about 400$ incl. taxes), nearly all stations are barrier free.
The key is that both adding car lanes and adding alternatives like transit are subject to induced demand, but the consequences of it are different for transit than for cars. Not only is the limit of the added capacity much, much higher for a train than it is for a car lane, adding more traffic to the lane up to that limit makes the performance worse and worse (increasing congestion), while adding more transit ridership up to its limit makes the performance better and better (increasing train frequency and therefore reducing wait times).
Similarly, induced demand for walking and biking is a good thing because more people doing those things improves public health, doesn’t pollute like cars do, and takes up much less space.
So it’s not that induced demand is bad, it’s that inducing demand for cars, specifically is bad.
Public transit that share lines with cars are always going to be worst that cars, but if you add exclusive lanes for Public transit they go smooth as hell. This is why metros are usually the best option on cities with good metro infrastructure.
having lived in cities with amazing metro, ok metro, no metro and towns with shitty train access and great train access…
this is 150% true. Having an underground station near your house makes the entire city 30 min away, using buses or horribly interconnected trains makes things 1 to 2 hours away.
Even living outside the city, having a direct rail to the nearest metropolitan center take an hour increased quality of life for me by a fuckload.
The goal for alternative transit is not to remove traffic jam, it’s to transport people.
9mph is slower than a bike, it fits with my experience. When living in a city (in Europe, it might be different in the US) my feeling was always that bike was the fastest, public transport a bit slower but more comfortable (mainly protected from the elements and car drivers) and lastly car was the slowest and more stressful.
There will always be traffic, but public transportation allows for a higher throughput for the same speed and total surface area of the roads.
Let’s be generous and assume that every car has 2 people in it (the truth is that the vast majority of cars, especially in the US, only have 1 person in them). Now imagine 15 cars vs. 30 bicycles. If we figure that you can comfortably fit 3 bikes in the same space as 1 car, you’re looking at 150% throughput for the bikes compared to the cars at the same speed. Give them their own dedicated, separate infrastructure, and they can probably go faster than traffic while also removing the danger of bikes and cars sharing the road. If you figure buses can fit 20 people in the space of 2 car lengths, you’re looking at 10x the throughput.
And that’s not even getting into transportation that doesn’t use the roads. The Boston T is a perfect example of this. Despite its notoriety for constant failures due to poor maintenance, and only being half the size it was 100 years ago, the T is considered to be the 3rd best public transportation network in the US. Why? Because the average commute time is about half the national average at roughly half an hour, and a full 50% of Boston’s commuters use the T every day. That’s half as many cars in traffic every day than if the T didn’t exist. Could you imagine if Boston, notorious for its bad roads and heavy traffic, suddenly had twice as many cars driving on its streets?
I heard a city planner talk about why adding a new lane doesn’t help, and the term they use is “induced demand.”
Basically, people are going to take the route that they consider the most convenient, and that usually comes down to time and effort. Traffic hurts both by taking more time and being more stressful to deal with. When you add a new lane to a road, people think that the traffic will be easier there, so they take that route instead of their normal one. So you’re just adding more cars to the traffic that match or exceed the throughput of your new lane, basically putting you back at square one but a few billion dollars more poor.
You’ve essentially added a single lane one-way road to help ease traffic across the entire city.
If you make driving easier than transit, more people will drive who previously took transit. The reverse is also true. One of these situations is more desirable for myriad reasons.
As well, additional demand can be created by convenience. People will make trips they otherwise never would have if it’s easier to make them.
Communist transportation will never ever ever ever ever ever ever be easier than driving.
Because driving is “get in the car, go directly to destination”
Public transport adds walk to transport rally point, wait, follow a compromise route to accomodate other travellers with many stop, consider all the strangers gazing and judging you, arrive at not your destination, walk 5 to 20 mins to your actual destination. Plus you must carry any object on your person while navigating the terrain (good luck hauling 50lbs of groceries).
I am simply not interested in this nightmare, find a solution that isn’t horrible.
And NOoo I don’t want Musks robot taxis from the “you will own nothing” dystopia.
As much as I personally disagree with you, given that all you’re thinking about is your own benefit, and not any of the myriad of benefits to the city, the world, the people who can’t afford cars, etc, I understand that your outlook is shared by the vast majority of Americans, and can’t be ignored if we ever hope to have an effective public transport system.
We’re going to need to somehow devise a system so convenient that it actually sounds attractive to the huge amount of people who spend 10%+ of their paycheck on car payments not because they have to, but because they want to.
I would love public transport that is actually better than a car. I can’t imagine how that could happen. So what they will probably do is cripple car users until it is intolerable to use. Like make it cost more than your yearly salary just for the license and insurance, plus 10x the price of fuel with taxes.
By “directly to destination” did you mean the gigantic parking lot necessary to accommodate every car? You are going to walk anyway, the different is that you’re walking in the most horrible hostile car centric space instead of one made for humans.
I live in the forest, we have no problem with parking. There is space everywhere. I don’t mind a little mud on my tires and shoes, not everywhere has to be concrete
City anti-car attitude will cause us a lot of pain. They will make car ownership painful to disincentivize it and we will just have to suck it up, if we fail to kill that movement.
My car is electric, if tgat’s a problem then I would instead recommend to make city cars not illegal. Personally I’ve always wanted a single seat car that weights as much as a motor cycle.
It already is, finding a parking spot and then walking through a parking lot is a lot less convenient than walking from the tram stop to the store and it’s roughly the same distance. I sold my car after moving to the city because public transit is so much more convenient.
Have you considered that within city, parking is a huge problem? Maybe in american suburb the parking space is big enough to fit housing for 100 families, but in the city they don’t have such luxury.
Now just like what you said about the public transport, for driving it’s get in the car, facing 20 min of traffic jam, waiting for traffic light, waiting for traffic light, waiting for another traffic light, reach your destination, find a parking, saw a spot, too bad because big dumb pickup truck double park because the parking spot is too small to fit that ego-sized vehicle, looking for another parking spot, finally found one but have to make 5 min walk to the shop. Now do the return trip.
The joke is on you. There are places where it already is easier than driving. What do such places have in common? There are so many people that having everyone drive is literally impossible to accommodate. You wouldn’t drive in Manhattan, Tokyo, or Seoul. It literally makes absolutely no sense to. In these cities, public transit is faster and way more convenient.
Smaller cities can replicate this effect by just… not outrageously favouring car infrastructure like they do today in North America. That doesn’t mean exclusively making driving worse, it means making public transit better at the same time with the freed up funding. And the freed up money is a lot, car infrastructure is super expensive. More routes with more stops at higher frequencies are made possible because of higher ridership, which increases convenience and makes it more likely you will get almost exactly from your origin to your destination.
But the American brain cannot conceive of this. “Communist transportation” fucking lmao. What if we made cities more liveable for humans, not for cars? Nah we can’t do that that’s communism.
So you think we should decentralize cities. Make it so you don’t need to go downtown for everything. Everything you need would be within 15 minutes of walking.
That’s the thing: Technically yes. It temporarily improves traffic. But only temporarily. IDK about you but spending billions of dollars to only temporarily improve traffic and then it ending up the same or even worse than before doesn’t sound like a good investment to me.
I thought the temporal improvement would be for everyone who already used the high way (because they will get to their destination a little bit faster). And for the few extra people, who start to use the highway but didn’t use it before, the improvment will stay.
That’s the thing, the number of new cars using that road ends up being at least one additional lane’s worth. So traffic moves at the same speed as it was before the extra lane, just now with one more lane’s worth of cars on that road.
If anything, you might see marginally better traffic on other roads because of the cars that started using the new lane, but you’d be talking about a handful of cars per road. Probably not enough for any discernible change in travel time or congestion, and each new lane you add later will have diminishing returns because it will be a smaller fraction of the total number of lanes coming from any specific direction.
Yes. That wasn’t the best word choice; maybe “group” would have been better. I meant groups of people who are willing to take some level of risk. Imagine the categories are “low risk takers”, “medium risk takers”, and “high risk takers”.
Compared to A paying out $40, if you make B $50-n you’ll only get the high risk takers choosing B. If you make it $70-n you’ll get high and medium risk takers. If you make it $120-n you’ll get almost everybody.
If risk taking is a value between 0 and 1, the categories are groups of people inside certain intervals. For example, low could be [0, 1/3), medium could be [1/3, 2/3), and high could be [2/3, 1].
A relative was talking about ordering stuff from Temu. My response was that the products sold through them (they're just a marketplace) are so cheap that there's got to be slavery involved.
From what I hear, it’s also Chinese manufacturers trying to “break in” to the western market by initially operating at a loss. But I doubt how effective of a business strategy that would be, given that there is basically zero brand loyalty on marketplaces like temu. Am I getting my USB dongles from CKXLKY or TOPK? Fuck if I care! Idk tho, maybe the experience is different for people who buy stuff other than cheap electronics.
But yeah, there is 100% slavery involved. It’s like the cacao/coffee/chocolate industries, down to the “don’t blame us, we’re just buying these goods at market prices, like everyone else” excuse. Brother, you are the one setting the market price.
Ironically I have had good enough experiences with one or two Chinese brands to probably look at their stuff first whenever I ultimately replace/upgrade what I’ve got from them, but they certainly aren’t the “spam random letters to game Amazon’s systems” sort of brands and are really only slightly cheaper than the equivalents from elsewhere.
My country made it illegal to sell at a loss (for that exact reason) and IIRC wish and/or temu got in some kind of legal trouble for it. So did IKEA when they tried to use their restaurant as a loss leader - illegal here!
Then there’s the matter of shipping subsidies from the PRC, ain’t no way cross-continent shipping is 0.02 € on a 5 € item for which the last mile is handled by the national postal service which I know for a fact charges anyone more than one euro for delivering a damn envelope.
Those reasons sound retarded. Having a loss leader product or line just means you are recouping it elsewhere. It’s a draw-in, like $1.25 hotdogs at Costco. It’s different than if your whole business operates at a loss for a certain time in order to squeeze out competition. The only way this would make even marginally sense is if say both IKEA and JYSK had a cafeteria and IKEA decided to sell food at a loss while JYSK would not be able to afford in that segment.
From what I know, it’s not actually China subsidizing shipping, but the individual target countries instead, mostly on taxpayer money. This wouldn’t be bad in practice, except that goods not originating from China do not have subsidized shipping, thus the unfair advantage.
memes
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.