| ▲ | 8f2ab37a-ed6c 12 hours ago |
| In the Bay Area it's easier to create AGI than reliable, consistent, clean public transit. |
|
| ▲ | femiagbabiaka 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| The Bay Area has reliable, clean, consistent public transit right now, it's just not evenly distributed |
|
| ▲ | zitterbewegung 40 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| One of these doesn't require a multi-decade approval process for good reason. (Figuring out the logistics and civil engineering planning is a real thing and building it out isn't trivial) . Of course this could change |
|
| ▲ | mixdup 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > The program applies to all 27 San Francisco Bay Area transit agencies that accept contactless Visa tap-to-pay. Probably has something to do with that. Why on Earth are there 27 different transit agencies in the Bay Area? Probably should be a single digit, no? |
| |
| ▲ | zardo an hour ago | parent [-] | | The why would be the ~100 municipalities in the bay area. |
|
|
| ▲ | mitxela 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| They haven't created AGI either, they're just applying the CADT development model to money. |
| |
|
| ▲ | ihsw 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It is a plain fact that there would be more interest in public transit if it was as clean, as safe, and as reliable (if not cleaner, safer, and more reliable) than driving using personal vehicles. |
| |
| ▲ | infecto 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | While I understand that “plain fact” is highly subjective, I would think downvoting is more appropriate than flagging. (Vouched) | |
| ▲ | doctorpangloss 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Would it make sense for cities to wait around, and buy huge fleets of autonomous vehicles? Probably. |
|
|
| ▲ | repeekad 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| [flagged] |
| |
| ▲ | UnfitFootprint 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Excluding the fact that drug addicts are still humans deserving love, care and the opportunity to recuperate - fostering a clean & safe transit environment is practically a solved problem internationally. Maybe the moral depravity of SF breeds truly irredeemable addicts, but as someone whos met a lot of troubled people and ridden a lot of public transit your statement seems alarmingly and unhelpfully critical | | |
| ▲ | cyberrock 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | >fostering a clean & safe transit environment is practically a solved problem internationally. In your opinion, what is that solution? If we take a survey of the highest ranked transit systems, it seems like most solutions involve not allowing drug users to use transit systems, whether it's the unthinkable in Asian countries or peppering the system with officers and cameras in Berlin and London. Is that really treating them with love? Considering how much often I smell alcohol and weed in Waymos, maybe it's actually the most tolerant solution. | | |
| ▲ | graemep 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | London's public transport was safe before the cameras became common. Its something everyone used, and everyone let their kids use, decades ago. Affluent people commuted from the Surrey "stockbroker belt" to London at least as far back as the 70s. Kids used trains and busses to go to school- some of my friends did at least as young as eight. | |
| ▲ | trollbridge 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | No. It means not allowing drug addicts (and everyone else) to mis-use transit systems. They are not hotels, homes, rehab clinics, or personal drug use pods. Cigarette smokers manage to ride trains and buses without lighting up. We should expect the same of everyone. | |
| ▲ | Throwaway123129 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | There’s barely any officers in the Berlin transit system. I get checked like 3 times per year |
| |
| ▲ | bko 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | There's nothing compassionate, loving or caring letting people kill themselves consuming hard drugs. | | |
| ▲ | Y-bar 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Loving or caring for someone is not giving their addiction a Carte Blanche, it can often be to allow them access to treatment and a path out of their situation. | | |
| ▲ | bko 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | They can access treatment. There are a lot of options. The question is should we force treatment at some point. Use the veil of ignorance to answer that. Suppose your loved one was one of these afflicted individuals literally killing themselves on the street. Would you want to force them to get clean or would you want to make their lives "easier" by giving them some "harm-reduction" that will allow them to persist in their zombie state? Or what if you were in the grips of this lifestyle. Would you want someone to force you to get help or facilitate you killing yourself? I know my answer | |
| ▲ | wallst07 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Walking through the tenderloin on a bad night seems like Carte Blanche to me, and it seems cruel and unusual (except maybe Philadelphia). | | |
| ▲ | Y-bar 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I don't know what the "tenderloin" refers to, but I guess it is a part of a US city. That's generally the point I am trying to make. By letting these people suffer from addiction and homelessness, not offering good medical and social care, you are not caring or loving them, which is a kind of cruelty. | | |
| ▲ | joenot443 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | FWIW if you search "tenderloin city" the answer appears immediately. It's a big internet, sometimes people will mention neighborhoods or customs you're unfamiliar with. In my experience, the polite thing is usually to take 3s to make the Google. | | |
| ▲ | pirates 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | In my experience the polite thing is to just say “San Francisco” instead of talking down to people. | |
| ▲ | Y-bar 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | This is the problem with context and language and assumptions and algorithms. Even with that I get two restaurants and one Wikipedia article on meat before I get anything resembling a city district in my search results. |
|
| |
| ▲ | Geezus_42 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | So what, put them in prison? |
|
| |
| ▲ | Geezus_42 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Can we really blame individuals when we have recorded, legally admissable evidence of corporations knowingly pushing the over-perscription of extremely addictive drugs while claiming they are safe and non-addictive? | | |
| ▲ | bko 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Yes. I don't think the typical homeless drug user is relying on pharma provided research on the substances they're ingesting when deciding to pick up the habit in the first place. |
|
| |
| ▲ | jimbob45 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | madeofpalk 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The situation is weird. No one thinks like this, or it isn't a problem, in cities that actually have good public transport. A drug addict has never entered my mind when riding public transport in London, Paris, Sydney, Tokyo, etc. | | |
| ▲ | bluGill 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | When a transit system is bad only those in the worst situations use it because they have no other options. Thus all you see are societies worst. When transit is good everybody uses it and normal people are the vast majority so you rarely see or notice the bad people. The percentage of bad people is about the same in both cities overall | | |
| ▲ | notnaut 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Even when a transit system is bad, you often find people use it anyway in situations where large events make driving a fool’s errand. There’s a hard incentive and comfort hurdle we’re decades from alleviating via impossible fuel prices for your average Joe | | |
| ▲ | bluGill 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | That is more mediocre versus bad. Most of the bad transit systems I'm aware of don't have service to large events at all and so it's not an option. | | |
| ▲ | notnaut 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Fair point. I likely never encountered truly bad public transit since it was never pointed to as viable. | | |
| ▲ | bluGill 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | There are a lot of unviable transit in the US. Most transit systems have large unviable parts even if there is a viable core (generally in the city center). People often blame the unviable on lack of density, but there are examples of viable transit systems elsewhere in the world that have US suburb density. | | |
| ▲ | vel0city an hour ago | parent [-] | | Can you share some examples of viable transit systems in areas with similar density to US suburbs? I'd like to know more. |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | numpad0 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | IMO the root cause of problems you guys are having is internalized classism and strong affections with the idea of natural selection. You can have a homogeneous society with good welfare and not worry too much about spoiling ourselves, a near or even actual communism with extremely subsidized educations can still have bloodbath levels of internal competitions. You can do that and then you can make it weird for tons of over/under class people with absolutely no way out to be just there in plain sight. | |
| ▲ | archagon 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I live in the heart of the Mission and I endorse that quote from the parent comment 100%. Once every few days I even share public transit with a homeless person! Oh, the horror!! The people I see out on the street are suffering terribly, sick, unable to escape the gravity of their situations, and the vast majority are not malicious. Anyone who does not see this has chipped away key bits of their own soul. | | |
| ▲ | wallst07 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Or hasn't been smacked in the face yet , or had someone unhinged on the nyc subway state they are going to kill everyone on the train in a manic episode. These are not un-rare events at all, it's just in a city with millions of people, most may never have it happen but we've all seen it. Nobody wants it to be them that day. | |
| ▲ | trollbridge 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Yes, but the minority who are malicious can render public spaces completely unusable. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | shrubby 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Drug addicts,when treated properly, are alright manageable. Without treatment or support these creations of a dog eat dog world become unpredictable. | | |
| ▲ | alwaysmrno 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | No
Absolutely not.
I have had enough to do with them to believe this lie.
They are broken people that are ruled by the drugs they are taking. they can be manageable when they have had their dose, but their entire life and existence is ruled by the need to find drugs for the next shot.
And believe me. When they feel that withdrawal they do not give a flying F about you or your rights. They need that drug.
People should not be forced to be around junkies | |
| ▲ | serbuvlad 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Not to get too political, but if you're right, why does it seem like societies which do not tolerate drug use have much fewer problems with rampant drug use than societies which tolerate it? | | |
| ▲ | notnaut 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | “Tolerate” is doing a lot of lifting here. You responded to someone saying treatment and support make addiction manageable. In the United States we had drug companies devising as many ways to make a profit off pain pills for years, so there’s tolerance, but when people started losing their jobs and their minds in mass due to the poison these companies were knowingly getting their customers addicted to, there was no plan or inclination for treatment or support. |
|
| |
| ▲ | hiddencost 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Disagree lol. We could move the entire population of San Francisco into full time care for very little compared to what we're spending on AI. | | | |
| ▲ | shafyy 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Are you arguing that the reason that the public transportation system in SF sucks is because of drug addicts? LOL | |
| ▲ | charcircuit 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | Arainach 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | > enacting the death penalty for substance abuse May you never see progress on such a horrifying goal. | | |
| ▲ | charcircuit 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | ga_to 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Killing people as punishment for poor choices they enact on their own bodies is such a medieval take that it frankly can only be satirical or gallows humor.
But it does fit with the puritanical punishment fetishizing culture that the USA has fostered. Instead of rehabilitating people let's just liquidate them. Sure why not. | |
| ▲ | 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
|
|
|
