again, the GOP in the months leading up to the election spent more on anti-trans rhetoric than all other issues combined, including immigration and the economy. if you saw any of these ads and the literal hate being spewed, you maybe would understand better.
Collusion is NOT a prerequisite to raising prices. No conspiracy is required. It also helps a lot that these large corporations have driven out their competition.
Different currencies already have different rules. Any good accounting software isn't going to assume US cents. Update your currency table to include a version of USD in increments of $0.001. Update the amounts on a need-be basis. ( Multiply by 10 and change the currency type)
> One company’s product lead pointed to thick traffic and unreliable public transportation. Another transplant cited the city’s 100-plus-degree heat, in what was one of the city’s most brutal summers since 2011, when only two days in July didn’t hit triple digits.
I was in SFO 2 weeks ago during a layover and overheard a guy talking about being on his way to Austin to do a final walkthrough of the house he was building there. As a Texan with with over 30 years of living in Austin under my belt I asked him how much time he's spent in Austin before building a home here. "A few days he said." I asked him if he's aware of the temp difference between SF, where he declared being born and raised, and Austin and his response was, "Yeah, but it's so much cheaper."
This was a week after eavesdropping on a man at a concert venue talking to someone about recently moving to Austin from SF and being stunned at how little there is to do here. How when he lived in SF he could easily get to the mountains and the beach and there were museums and events outside of Austin's limited music and BBQ scene.
All of that to say none of them are the brightest bunch. They move here because it's cheap and they visited during SXSW or ACL when it wasn't 120 degrees and they they thought "it's so cheap and fun here" without looking at the big picture.
I've lived here (in Austin) for three years. My partner and I decided to move to smaller city in Washington state come November. There is a lot of things to like about Austin (and even Texas), but as someone who was born and raised in the Pacific Northwest, I don't think I can live here longterm.
It's not just the heat, but there's definitely more unnecessarily oversized vehicles on the road with only a single occupant driving. I'll admit it may be all in my head and I only notice these things because I'm in a different environment, but it seems many people here don't user turn signals, run red lights, and are regularly looking down at their phone while driving their truck or SUV, all while driving 10-15mph over the speed limit in a residential area. /rant
I don’t think it’s in you’re head. I’ve driven across most of the U.S. and have lived in major cities that are known for their traffic/bad drivers, and Texas, by a long shot, had some of the worst drivers I’ve seen across the U.S. Same experience as you, reckless speeding, drivers running red lights and making unsafe lane changes in massive pick up trucks.
This might have to do with an old law that was changed around 2008-2010ish that allowed permitted drivers to skip the physical driver’s test if they opted to learn through the parent taught driver’s ed program (the driver’s parents could essentially just sign a form saying the driver had enough hours of driving experience which would allow them to waive the in person driving test).
I've lived in the DC area, the Bay Area, visited NYC, and various other cities in the US. I lived in Brussels, Belgium for almost eight years, and in that time we visited many countries in Europe, including London, Edinburgh, Berlin, Paris, Rome, and Naples, among many others. I've also lived in Austin since 2006.
I wouldn't say the drivers here are the worst in the US. In my experience, that would be DC, NYC, and the Bay Area. The bigger cities seem to attract the worse drivers, and those are like bad apples that spoil the bunch. Because Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio drivers are all worse than Austin drivers.
But US drivers are not anywhere remotely as close to the bad drivers in Europe. My skills learned the hard way in Brussels stood me in good stead when we went to Paris and Rome, the two places where I've seen the worst drivers I've ever encountered.
Yes, Texas is the land that inspired the Canyonero, and other giant size SUVs. Today, I'd be terrified to drive anything that wasn't nearly the same height, even if it's not nearly as long. And yes, Austin has the worst stretch of Highway in the country, known as I-35. Anyone who has driven in Austin for any reasonable period of time knows to avoid I-35 like the plague. But MoPac and 360 aren't all that much better -- especially with all the construction that is and will continue to be happening on 360 for the next several years.
IMO, the drivers aren't the big problem here in Austin. The big problem would be the combination of the extreme temperatures (both hot and cold) and the continuing piss poor performance of ERCOT, the organization responsible for running the Texas electric grid.
There are plenty of good things to do here, except when things like SXSW comes to town. That's when you want to make sure to take your vacation and get at least 50-100 miles away. And good live music is happening all over town, not just down on the tourist-happy 6th street.
My dad lived in a Memphis, and his parents lived in Murfreesboro. I've done extensive driving in both of those areas, and the stretch of I-40 between them. My dad passed away a couple of years ago, but I haven't seen crazy drivers in TN that are as bad as the ones I've seen here in Texas.
Regarding driver behavior, I feel the same way about the SF Bay Area for the past three years. I think the pandemic really did something strange to us. Whether it gave us faulty memories of a better time, or caused a regression in civic-mindedness, it is hard to tell...
Ehh I dunno about that. I’ve lived in Austin for 15 years and in Spokane before that. A lot of people in eastern Washington drive pointless gigantic trucks just like Texas lol, especially because of the snow.
It's a sad state of affairs when somebody feels compelled to do this much work to determine why a pedestrian bridge (that connects two neighborhoods) needs to exist.
The plane question stated the plane was `over` the park which implies it is not in the park. If the question instead said `through` the park, the answer would differ.
The question intentionally left out the altitude of the vehicle in order to trick us into thinking it’s a harder question to answer than it really is. I agree that ‘over’ tends to somewhat imply out, and ‘through’ tends to imply in, and would indeed change the distribution of answers.
In at least some countries (such as the U.S., and I would speculate practically all countries in the age of commercial flight and private drones, but I don’t know that for a fact) there are laws that define whether flying “over” a public park means in our out, and the park’s bounding volume is defined with a specific altitude ceiling. (It may be different depending on the type of aircraft, e.g., civilian drone vs emergency helicopter vs commercial airliner, etc.)
The author’s trick worked. People are arguing over whether a hypothetical airplane is in the hypothetical park without knowing the altitude or location, rather than pointing at the fact that he question is intentionally under-specified and the right answer depends on important details that were left out.
Given that a helicopter at that speed is a clear hazard to anyone below it and will blow a person below it off their feet, and could easily be pushed around or into the ground at any time (sudden gusts of winds do happen, although I have no real experience with helicopters so I may be wrong on some specifics), that is through.
"the park" includes not only the ground, but also a certain area above the ground - otherwise someone riding a bike through the park wouldn't be in the park (as they are not touching the ground) but their bike would be. That would be absurd.
Given that the whole point of the website and the discussion is the fuzziness that any such rule implies, I'm pretty sure they _do_ see the point, but decided to play the interpretation game anyway. What's your point?
Your list of altitudes didn’t go high enough to change the answer. ;) Drones (in the US and the UK) must be limited to 400ft/120m and are still considered “in” the airspace of the ground they’re over. Commercial aircraft flying at 35,000ft AGL are not considered to be in the airspace of a specific park or private property when over the U.S. (and most of the world, I suspect), but they are considered to be inside the country’s airspace, since park & private property airspace has a limited ceiling, but country airspace extends up to space.
Let's say we imagine a dome over the park which is geometrically a convex hull that encloses all the tree tops. Everything in that dome is in the park.
In the U.S., by FAA law, flying a helicopter 10 feet off the ground in a public park is both over the ground and through (or “in”) the park. There’s no either-or.
Depends on how you word the question. If you say the helicopter is flying 10 feet over the park, by the rules of this game it's objectively not a violation. If you say it's 10 feet above the ground inside the park, objectively a violation.
reply