Also 14th and 19th, plus the Civil Rights Act. A non-corrupt SCOTUS would toss the Florida law immediately, but absent a couple minutes under Warren we have never had one of those.
I still like Fira Code better. These are really nice and if there was a fast and easy way to implement fonts to my syntax highlighting maybe I'd give it more of a spin, but that seems really annoying to set up and baseline I don't find any of these easier to read than Fira.
There are formulations that can be absorbed through the skin -- transdermal patches for fentanyl exist -- but it is certainly not going to happen accidentally or with regular formulations.
She didn't "shut him down". She tried to get in a point across and he barged right on along unimpeded by her and continued peddling more bullshit and conspiracy theory.
The truth means absolutely nothing to a conservative. Evidence means nothing when you never cared about reality in the first place.
And I think it's not hard to argue that he did quite a bit towards reducing car-centric design as a mayor. Mayors have WAY more control over that stuff, in general. The DOTs are the DOTs. They're going to be conservative and they're going to waste money. They also don't really follow federal marching orders.
Biden/Buttigieg have pushed for more Amtrak investment than has happened in a long time, though, along with proposals for further expansion for local rail and BRT service. Just a typical case study in a progressive failing the leftist purity test.
Public employees are exempt from the NLRA and it is not abnormal for an independently wealthy public sector employee to accept an appointment with a $1/yr wage. Also not covered are air/railway workers (who are covered under the RLA), agricultural workers who have some very weird and problematic coverage, and certain domestic workers/contractors for... some fucking reason and with some effect.
Never underestimate how much of a shithole the US is for labor.
Yeah. On the one hand, fuck all the evil fucks at meta. On the other, we need to stop pretending the private sector is going to make rules and frameworks to protect anyone. We all know that private capital is not capable of behaving ethically unless directed to at the barrel of a gun.
It shouldn't be that way. We should be able to trust that people will behave ethically. But we can't. They won't. They are unethical and like being that way. They're monsters and have no intention to be otherwise.
It's called an Orphan Crushing Machine story. As in, "how nice it is that the whole community came together to raise money to stop little orphan Annie from being tossed into the orphan crushing machine!". Stories that don't bother to ask the important questions like "Why is there an orphan-crushing machine?" and "Why on earth did they all have to raise money to pay someone to stop an orphan from being tossed into said machine?!"
Once you learn to recognize them, you realize it's what 99% of 'feel good' news stories really are.
But this one is a lot more sensitive to that narrative than most, so I'd still recommend the read.
That's why I'll defend vigorously the way we use SMS in the US.
Sure, it's an outdated, insecure, bad system. Improvements like RCS are still iffy and poorly-rolled-out. But it's also a standard you can use to connect with EVERYONE, isn't controlled by a single private company (even if the evil fucks at Google desperately want it to be), and is totally interoperable between apps (since the apps are, after all, merely implementing a protocol).
I have high hopes the interoperability standards the EU is proposing will amount to something, but I won't be holding my breath for it. In the meantime, I am not going to switch to whatever app is trending until it can at LEAST do everything I currently can with SMS.
Having elections for sheriffs betrays the lie so many tell themselves that police are neutral arbiters. That they are there to follow and enforce the law fairly.
If that were true, it would be a technocratic and apolitical office. It would be appointed by a bi/nonpartisan committee or some such.
Having it be an elected office is way more honest. That it is a political position. That people want the police to be political and enforce political ideologies. They do not want disinterested police. They want their political enemies bound and beaten and their political allies shielded.
I guess I need to decide whether or not I prefer my fascism to be cryptic-flavored.
This is the Philly paper. You can explore through its cited bys and references if you want to see the continuing state of the research, but it's pretty rock-solid. There's very little doubt in the minds of any policy experts I know of or have read that signaled intersections, in urban contexts, should be used far less. That all-way stops are almost universally a safer design.
Your response on my points about delay is very much just one small problem thinking. I admit, LA's traffic situation is utterly fucked (thanks to putting the car at the center of all their urban planning for decades, which results in cities that are somehow undriveable AND impossible to navigate outside of cars at the same time). As a person who is immersed in this (and currently published in the TRB, if you can take my word on it because I won't be doxxing myself), let me assure you: traffic engineers are lazy, unimaginative fuckers. They follow their design manuals like bibles. ROR is easy to execute so they execute it rather than spending the extra 30-40 minutes to include more comprehensive phasing in their proposals. The manuals tell them that's all they have to and most others are too scared to challenge their "expertise".
Any traffic system that is going to gridlock because of removal of ROR was misdesigned. Period. Also was probably going to do it anyway, especially as traffic naturally grows over time (outside of the effective policy projects to reduce traffic, e.g., complete streets/multi-modal transportation plans).
If it is low enough volume that it makes sense to have ROR, it shouldn't have the signal at all.
If it is high enough volume that it risks serious problems if ROR is removed, the ROR almost certainly unsafe to begin with and a dedicated turn signal should be incorporated. Even if it just a signal indicating when it is acceptable to make an unprotected right on red.
ROR is currently the default and "opt-out" in relevant US intersections. It should, at best, be an opt in (e.g., with an arrow indicating you can turn right while yielding during certain phases).
I am not saying all traffic lights should go, but we have far, far, far too many of them. ESPECIALLY in the US, where they basically always have extremely simplistic phasing that, outside of peak rush hour times, simply increases average trip times.
To put it another another way: Braess's paradox hints at a larger truth: the systems that intuitively seem helpful to prevent congestion are often what CAUSED the congestion. There's no strong research on AB testing for congestion vs traffic signal removal that I am aware of, unfortunately, because the study is just laden with confounders eliminating any real AB comparison (e.g., making streets safer for multimodal traffic, e.g., by removing signals and replacing with all-way stops, leads to fewer people driving and that may be the "real" reason congestion goes down).
Don't miss the forest for the trees. Removing right on red is a safety win anywhere you do it. The congestion effects, if and when they even exist, can be addressed through separate system adjustments.
RE: crime... nothing is a better crime deterrent than humans present. My prescription is still to make the streets and neighborhoods more walkable. Adjust policies and designs to get more people comfortable being out there. Not even going to get into challenging the idea that crime is truly on the rise -- we both know that it isn't really.
No one has a pass to be conservative, especially a queer person. No one. Not one person. It is not acceptable to be a bigot, a bully. It's not acceptable to be cruel just because you believe there is a certain social hierarchy that ought to be enforced. All the tenants of conservatism are unacceptable. And if you are queer, you now have INTIMATE knowledge of what it is like to be on the receiving end of that hatred and oppression and should know better than most to take no part in it.
Also 14th and 19th, plus the Civil Rights Act. A non-corrupt SCOTUS would toss the Florida law immediately, but absent a couple minutes under Warren we have never had one of those.