zlacker

[return to "San Francisco homelessness: Park ranger helps one person at a time"]
1. radu_f+px[view] [source] 2025-02-17 05:05:36
>>NaOH+(OP)
> shepherding him through what one Recreation and Parks Department official described as the “arduous and achingly bureaucratic tasks” necessary just to be eligible for housing.

I'm going to risk a political statement and say that this is why I'm mostly hopeful about DOGE, even if parts of it are a shit show.

Building civilization comes with a hefty dose of institutional entropy, which keeps accumulating, despite (or often because) good intentions and competence. Everybody is improving their piece of the map, but this means you get stuck in a lot of spots of local maxima. Some can be fixed from a level above, but some need a round of creative destruction every 10 years or so.

I've read this yesterday: https://unchartedterritories.tomaspueyo.com/p/why-japan-succ...

It's a good read and a good blog for many reasons, but the relevant part to this conversation: Japan managed to keep a very high level of living even through decades of economic stagnation and aging population in large part by having a sane zoning system. Yes, that simple. They have 12, nation-wide, mostly inclusive zoning types. This means the permitted building types carry over as you move up the categories, allowing mixed-use development by default.

And indeed, you can actually go to Japan and buy a house for about the price of a decent car - which coincidently used to be the case in most of the world, before the double pressure of zoning/coding on one hand, and migration towards urban centers on the other squeezed the housing pricing way above what actual costs would have it be.

◧◩
2. crooke+iB[view] [source] 2025-02-17 05:48:02
>>radu_f+px
How in the world is randomly firing people supposed to make anything more efficient? They literally don't even know what the people they're firing do, as seen with the latest mess with the Department of Energy.
◧◩◪
3. Workac+UG1[view] [source] 2025-02-17 15:15:32
>>crooke+iB
Fiery take, but Elon eviscerated twitter and just kept kicking people out seemingly randomly. Anyone who didn't like it was encouraged walk out too on top of that. Twitter was doomed and the internet was rife with how it's collapse was immanent.

But he we are three years later and twitter is still running and still top dog in the message-post space.

I can't help but feel that in the presence of lots of money, organizations just bloat and bloat and bloat, and all that bloat will be sure to have a long winded explanation for why it is _critical_ to stay in existence.

◧◩◪◨
4. jonkoo+PT1[view] [source] 2025-02-17 16:27:48
>>Workac+UG1
Twitter is losing more money than before Musk, so I personally don't see how this is working out except as a mechanism to extract power.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. aketch+UV1[view] [source] 2025-02-17 16:39:47
>>jonkoo+PT1
twitter corporate bonds are trading at 97 cents on the dollar now, they were trading closer to 40 cents shortly after the acquisition. I would not assume they are still losing money
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. rurp+8h2[view] [source] 2025-02-17 18:47:44
>>aketch+UV1
The massive interest payments he added match or exceed the entire company revenue. There is no way the company is even close to making money.
[go to top]