Places with really good train infrastructure tend to be places with really high population density. Even in China, there isn't great train infrastructure everywhere, just in areas with very high population density. The areas with low population density such as the mountainous regions don't tend to have lots of great train service. It's particularly good in the highest population density regions.
Similarly, Japan has great train service since there are 250 million people on a small series of islands.
Europe is another example, where a relatively large number of people live in large dense cities throughout Europe. Many Europeans come to North America and assume travel will be similar to Europe where you can visit a bunch of places in a short period of time because they're relatively close together, and then are shocked for example to learn that it takes 4 days to drive from Toronto to Winnipeg and most of the area between is just bush with little to no people living there. Winnipeg only has about a million people. Saskatoon and Regina are only 250,000 people each. Calgary is about 1.4 million and Edmonton is about 1 million, and even in BC you're only getting 3 million people province-wide in a nation 30% larger than the entire nation of France. When you take a flight over the country you see huge forests for hours at a time. The US is different of course, but lots of parts of it aren't that different. There's some highly populated areas, but there's some similarly unpopulated ones and whereas a plane simply ignores those areas, a train needs to travel through every inch.
There are regions with train service in America. In Canada, I've been on good trains in Vancouver, Toronto, and I've also taken trains in Ottawa. In all 3 cases it was the highest population density in Canada. There are also decent trains in New York and California, both regions with high population density.
Under both capitalist liberal democracy or authoritarianism, the construction of a common good requires two things: enough people to justify doing the project, and enough other stuff going on (or potentially going on in the future) to justify the project. Under both systems you burn through different forms of capital to get these projects done, and so eventually the laws of physics will pull you to the ground if you're doing wasteful things that don't help the people or the state.
In both cases, a certain solution must compete with other solutions for time and money. In the case of trains, they compete with planes for long distances and cars in shorter distances. The benefit of trains is they can carry overwhelmingly large numbers of people very efficiently and so if you have the population density you can carry lots of passengers and so justify your rail system. On the other hand, if there just aren't that many people then there just isn't anyone to use the system and so you're using all these resources for basically nobody, particularly if the potential users have other options and so take a car or a bus or a plane.
In the early industrial period, the monopoly trains had on travel allowed a lot of inefficiency. Railway companies built entire towns were built every so often to ensure there was water and coal for trains, and there were also stores in each so people could buy stuff along the way (or for those living in the towns) and in those towns the railway was virtually the entire economy but there was no other option for travel so that level of inefficiency for passenger travel was nonetheless justified. I went to one such town. All that's there today is a clearing, a railroad track, some building foundations if you look carefully, and an unkept graveyard.
Having higher population density would justify lots of investment in trains because you'd have so many people to move. The regions of China and Japan with great train service are highly populated, and to justify really good trains everywhere in Canada and the US, you'd need high population density everywhere. Towns of 5000 or 10,000 people would need 10x that number of people, and regions with nobody in them (of which there's lots) would need lots of people.
Given that the geographical reality is that North America has much more favorable geography than the bulk of China which is largely unpopulated and doesn't have many trains as a result, to have the equivalent would easily require 8 billion people to justify a really great investment in continent-wide rail. Even that may be a low estimate given just how much space we're talking about and the scale required to justify all the expense. Planes only require an airport at the source and destination and a plane. Considering that there might be only a few dozen major destinations, it is obvious why air travel has essentially taken over the long range travel market.
When it comes to climate comparisons, I think it isn't so simple as "trains use less fuel per passenger". To get from new York to California by rail you'd need to destroy huge amounts of nature, and burn through massive amounts of energy, including in the production of steel and concrete in unimaginable amounts, particularly for high speed rail systems. I suspect the calculus might not be so favorable in that light, especially if the trains are mostly empty because they don't solve a problem in many cases along American routes.
Similarly, Japan has great train service since there are 250 million people on a small series of islands.
Europe is another example, where a relatively large number of people live in large dense cities throughout Europe. Many Europeans come to North America and assume travel will be similar to Europe where you can visit a bunch of places in a short period of time because they're relatively close together, and then are shocked for example to learn that it takes 4 days to drive from Toronto to Winnipeg and most of the area between is just bush with little to no people living there. Winnipeg only has about a million people. Saskatoon and Regina are only 250,000 people each. Calgary is about 1.4 million and Edmonton is about 1 million, and even in BC you're only getting 3 million people province-wide in a nation 30% larger than the entire nation of France. When you take a flight over the country you see huge forests for hours at a time. The US is different of course, but lots of parts of it aren't that different. There's some highly populated areas, but there's some similarly unpopulated ones and whereas a plane simply ignores those areas, a train needs to travel through every inch.
There are regions with train service in America. In Canada, I've been on good trains in Vancouver, Toronto, and I've also taken trains in Ottawa. In all 3 cases it was the highest population density in Canada. There are also decent trains in New York and California, both regions with high population density.
Under both capitalist liberal democracy or authoritarianism, the construction of a common good requires two things: enough people to justify doing the project, and enough other stuff going on (or potentially going on in the future) to justify the project. Under both systems you burn through different forms of capital to get these projects done, and so eventually the laws of physics will pull you to the ground if you're doing wasteful things that don't help the people or the state.
In both cases, a certain solution must compete with other solutions for time and money. In the case of trains, they compete with planes for long distances and cars in shorter distances. The benefit of trains is they can carry overwhelmingly large numbers of people very efficiently and so if you have the population density you can carry lots of passengers and so justify your rail system. On the other hand, if there just aren't that many people then there just isn't anyone to use the system and so you're using all these resources for basically nobody, particularly if the potential users have other options and so take a car or a bus or a plane.
In the early industrial period, the monopoly trains had on travel allowed a lot of inefficiency. Railway companies built entire towns were built every so often to ensure there was water and coal for trains, and there were also stores in each so people could buy stuff along the way (or for those living in the towns) and in those towns the railway was virtually the entire economy but there was no other option for travel so that level of inefficiency for passenger travel was nonetheless justified. I went to one such town. All that's there today is a clearing, a railroad track, some building foundations if you look carefully, and an unkept graveyard.
Having higher population density would justify lots of investment in trains because you'd have so many people to move. The regions of China and Japan with great train service are highly populated, and to justify really good trains everywhere in Canada and the US, you'd need high population density everywhere. Towns of 5000 or 10,000 people would need 10x that number of people, and regions with nobody in them (of which there's lots) would need lots of people.
Given that the geographical reality is that North America has much more favorable geography than the bulk of China which is largely unpopulated and doesn't have many trains as a result, to have the equivalent would easily require 8 billion people to justify a really great investment in continent-wide rail. Even that may be a low estimate given just how much space we're talking about and the scale required to justify all the expense. Planes only require an airport at the source and destination and a plane. Considering that there might be only a few dozen major destinations, it is obvious why air travel has essentially taken over the long range travel market.
When it comes to climate comparisons, I think it isn't so simple as "trains use less fuel per passenger". To get from new York to California by rail you'd need to destroy huge amounts of nature, and burn through massive amounts of energy, including in the production of steel and concrete in unimaginable amounts, particularly for high speed rail systems. I suspect the calculus might not be so favorable in that light, especially if the trains are mostly empty because they don't solve a problem in many cases along American routes.
China is a poor example since to be comparable you'd need approximately 8 billion people on the American continent...
As long as you're not representing yourself as actually being the person, I'm pretty sure it's fairly unregulated. There's all kinds of people who make their living doing impressions of other people, and while it's not strictly a deepfake, it's similarly making an imperfect copy of someone else's voice. It might be different if you're directly using recordings, but that's another underregulated aspect of AI -- they soaked up all kinds of stuff without any repercussions.
In burlington it's much cheaper -- only 1400/mo, but you do need to share it with 23 other people who sleep in 1 hour shifts.
I believe I posted something similar to this before:
Big tech playlist:
1. enter deregulated space
2. abuse deregulated space
3. lobby for regulation in deregulated space
4. own the regulated space (with regulations they helped write) forever.
Big tech playlist:
1. enter deregulated space
2. abuse deregulated space
3. lobby for regulation in deregulated space
4. own the regulated space (with regulations they helped write) forever.
So I ran some basic functionality tests with my new 8bitdo adapter.
First step was pairing with my xbox one controller. I didn't know if it would even pair, since I didn't pick the wireless controller for use with this device. It appears to have paired successfully, I just needed to press the pair button on each.
It's been inconsistent whether you need to repair all the time. It seems like maybe once you're paired on each OS or device it's happy? It seems like I had to pair once on linux, windows, and android, but switching between them seems to keep the pairing.
Second step was testing windows joystick support. It looks like it shows up in the game controllers page of control panel and all the appropriate stuff works.
Third step is testing xinput. I tested Cyberdimension Neptunia and it worked just fine, same as if it was the xbox pad working as it normally does.
Fourth step was testing in linux. I fired up linux and started Hotline Miami, and the game worked correctly. I also discovered that steam big screen mode works too.
Fifth test was on a lark, tried connecting to my R35S+ handheld through the otg port, but it had no effect. I didn't expect it to work (so far only wifi has worked), but it was worth a try. So far the R35S+ has only really supported a wifi device on the otg port so it isn't a surprise.
Sixth test was on my Galaxy S10 phone using a usb c to usb a adapter. It paired and I was able to do some limited controls using the gamepad and buttons. One surprise occurred when I opened final fantasy 7 -- when I opened the game, it seemed to recognise the gamepad and let me play using it.
So that's pretty interesting for now. I bought it to use on a Playstation Classic, and it looks like it'll be great for that purpose. Future testing I'll want to try is pairing multiple controllers at once, and whether a playstation or wii controller paired will run using the xinput protocol so you can use it like an xbox controller.
So far, I expect to buy a couple more, seems like a great product at a great price (25 canuckistani kopecs)
First step was pairing with my xbox one controller. I didn't know if it would even pair, since I didn't pick the wireless controller for use with this device. It appears to have paired successfully, I just needed to press the pair button on each.
It's been inconsistent whether you need to repair all the time. It seems like maybe once you're paired on each OS or device it's happy? It seems like I had to pair once on linux, windows, and android, but switching between them seems to keep the pairing.
Second step was testing windows joystick support. It looks like it shows up in the game controllers page of control panel and all the appropriate stuff works.
Third step is testing xinput. I tested Cyberdimension Neptunia and it worked just fine, same as if it was the xbox pad working as it normally does.
Fourth step was testing in linux. I fired up linux and started Hotline Miami, and the game worked correctly. I also discovered that steam big screen mode works too.
Fifth test was on a lark, tried connecting to my R35S+ handheld through the otg port, but it had no effect. I didn't expect it to work (so far only wifi has worked), but it was worth a try. So far the R35S+ has only really supported a wifi device on the otg port so it isn't a surprise.
Sixth test was on my Galaxy S10 phone using a usb c to usb a adapter. It paired and I was able to do some limited controls using the gamepad and buttons. One surprise occurred when I opened final fantasy 7 -- when I opened the game, it seemed to recognise the gamepad and let me play using it.
So that's pretty interesting for now. I bought it to use on a Playstation Classic, and it looks like it'll be great for that purpose. Future testing I'll want to try is pairing multiple controllers at once, and whether a playstation or wii controller paired will run using the xinput protocol so you can use it like an xbox controller.
So far, I expect to buy a couple more, seems like a great product at a great price (25 canuckistani kopecs)
I grabbed one of the black ones, I picked it up for my playstation classic once I realized how much cool stuff you can do with that unit now.
Heads and shoulders better than the microsoft dongle so far, even just for the reason it works on stuff other than windows 10/11
Heads and shoulders better than the microsoft dongle so far, even just for the reason it works on stuff other than windows 10/11
My 8bitdo USB wireless adapter just came in. It looks like it'll connect nearly any wireless controller to windows, Linux, or switch. I'll let everyone know how it works out, particularly on Linux because one thing holding me back from Linux gaming is my wireless Xbox adapter which doesn't seem to be supported.
I'm at the drug store and they ask "do you want to donate 2 dollars for women's equity in health?"
Now keep in mind, I live in country with universal healthcare.
If half my income and 14% of every purchase that I make isn't enough to get equity in women's health, I don't think another two bucks at the drug stores quite going to do anything. Maybe it's time to take away the bottle, you're drunk.
Now keep in mind, I live in country with universal healthcare.
If half my income and 14% of every purchase that I make isn't enough to get equity in women's health, I don't think another two bucks at the drug stores quite going to do anything. Maybe it's time to take away the bottle, you're drunk.
It's tough. People who know what theyre doing want an air gap, but:
1. Suits really want access to information about the process right fucking now so you need at least a dmz at your head office, and
2. Municipal water systems tend to be spread out over miles and miles and so to get connectivity for example to a lift station you need all kinds of infrastructure to connect between everything or you use a public internet connection at a fraction of the price.
Municipal water budgets, in spite of how crazy expensive municipal water is, don't tend to be that high and so if they can save some money by doing things the easier way they will.
Of course, that doesn't mean that everyone needs to throw their plcs directly on the public internet. At the very least, there's absolutely no reason why those remote sites can't be connecting back to the main plant network using vpns that are at least several orders of magnitude more secure than the systems they'd be protecting.
1. Suits really want access to information about the process right fucking now so you need at least a dmz at your head office, and
2. Municipal water systems tend to be spread out over miles and miles and so to get connectivity for example to a lift station you need all kinds of infrastructure to connect between everything or you use a public internet connection at a fraction of the price.
Municipal water budgets, in spite of how crazy expensive municipal water is, don't tend to be that high and so if they can save some money by doing things the easier way they will.
Of course, that doesn't mean that everyone needs to throw their plcs directly on the public internet. At the very least, there's absolutely no reason why those remote sites can't be connecting back to the main plant network using vpns that are at least several orders of magnitude more secure than the systems they'd be protecting.
If you think about it, you feel richer while you rack up debt because you can get whatever you want, but when you pay back debt and rack up savings you feel poor because you can't get the things you want, but the one activity makes you poorer and the other makes you richer. A surprising number of millionaires drive 10 year old Toyotas.
It's really easy. Just have everyone sell everything and go into debt. Net worth drops, GDP goes to the moon.
GDP is the movement of money, not the wealth of anyone so you can have greater wealth with lower GDP if people end up accumulating weather and not spending it, or a higher GDP and lower wealth if people spend all their wealth (particularly on consumable garbage from china)
GDP is the movement of money, not the wealth of anyone so you can have greater wealth with lower GDP if people end up accumulating weather and not spending it, or a higher GDP and lower wealth if people spend all their wealth (particularly on consumable garbage from china)
One of the chapters in the Graysonian Ethic is "failure is an option". It talks about a time in my life where I thought because I was smart (and everyone told me I was smart so I didn't realize how retarded I actually am) everything would come easy, and people said you couldn't possibly fail in high school because it's designed to push idiots through, so I didnt barely even show up. Surprise surprise I flunked out of school and learned that failure is in fact an option, and it sucks. I spent a huge amount of effort just not having to graduate a year late.
So that's a danger of being called high IQ, you think you're too good for the work and destined to succeed.
Of course, there's also the fact that a PhD may not make as much as someone with a common skilled trade. They may be socially higher on the prestige ladder, but prestige doesn't pay your mortgage.
So that's a danger of being called high IQ, you think you're too good for the work and destined to succeed.
Of course, there's also the fact that a PhD may not make as much as someone with a common skilled trade. They may be socially higher on the prestige ladder, but prestige doesn't pay your mortgage.
I've had ark survival evolved in my steam library for 2 years but I don't remember playing it even once. I should give it a shot.