An RV is just a nicer tent, it is not a house. If people won't transition to housing, then they need to leave SF. If they can not afford SF, then they need to leave SF and live somewhere else where they can.
When properly accommodated, it's a nicer tent with electricity, AC, and an actual bed, kitchen, and bathroom. With tents you get dangerous hotplates/camping stoves and people pissing and shitting in streets instead of toilets. Some people really prefer the mobility, but most would happily transition to housing as soon it is made affordable/available. There are more vacant homes in SF than homeless people, and foreign investors buy up huge amounts of residential property and leave them empty.
I think most people wouldn't mind (as much) clean, functioning RVs. The people living like that are likely getting swept up in the backlash against the broken/unsafe RVs that cause a lot of problems for neighbors. This is anecdotal for sure, but the RVs near my neighborhood in San Jose are really rough. Missing windows, full of trash/vermin, and don't seem to have working facilities.
I don't have any idea what percentage of RVs fall into which camp, I just know that the bad ones are very visible.
Tents are safer and better in a bunch of different ways. Imagine if the tents had electrical systems like motorhomes do. Fire, environmental damage, crime, public costs, all favor cheap, safe disposable tents over motorhomes.
The answer isn’t motorhomes or tents, it’s better political leadership and a healthier less likely to fall into homelessness middle class.
> If they can not afford SF, then they need to leave SF and live somewhere else where they can.
To clarify: you believe that the cheapest available housing today should be used to determine if someone is allowed to live in SF? If not, how are you quantifying “can afford SF”?
If you won’t quantify your expectations, would you mind elaborating on what the minimum qualified definition is for you? In terms of what must be met, not what must not be met? I can agree it’s nice to not have folks living in tents and RVs.
We seem to be talking past one another for some reason. The bar is "is not living in a tent". It means living in a place that isn't a tent. We can rathole into how that wants to be defined exactly, and pick that apart, but that doesn't seems all that interesting to me but if you'd like to propose something we can iterate on specific wording as to what constitutes "living in a tent".
Still, the California building code 709b discusses sleeping and alludeds so a definition for bedroom, so going in that direction, in order to be not living in a tent, a person would need to have their own access to a legal bedroom, as defined by the building code. There is a $20k fine if people are sleeping in, eg, the twitter offices, which was not zoned for that.
No worries. I’m just wondering what you are expecting to constitute the minimum since the next logical step is to ask where the government should then draw the line on helping folks or essentially kicking them out of the city. Right now your definition lets folks lucky enough to have relatives with an extra couch stay while orphans would be gone at 18 just by dumb luck.
Oh. I wasn't the one saying we should kick people out who can't afford SF, I was just taking issue with "can afford to live in SF" as some undefinable standard. If I had my druthers, we'd subsidize and encourage building housing until the city looked like Hong Kong and everybody had places to live, but I'm not in charge of things.
No way. You need an immigration system that has a "try before you buy" aspect to it. Not all educated immigrates are going to like the US and are not going to be a fit for the US. It's not just about keeping out bad education, it's making sure that those who think they want to want to immigrate to the US want to be part of the US.
> Is a big problem for passenger trains in the US, freight has priority.
This simply not true. Federal Laws says that Passenger trains have priority but the law is never enforced. Freight traffic is suppose to take by-passes to let passenger traffic through and freight traffic is never suppose to block the line. However, again, the laws and rail rules are never enforced. Think about it, why would cargo have a higher priority than human traffic? Is cargo getting there an few hours later or earlier going to impact anything? With humans, it will totally impact their schedule and how often trains are used.
If the Department of Transportation wanted people to start taking trains again, they would come down hard of rail companies that slow down passenger traffic.
Freight doesn't generally use bypasses or sidings anymore. It's part of the "Precision Scheduled Railroading" movement to optimize operating ratio above all other concerns - mostly because freight train executives and investors believe that railroads are in long-term terminal decline and thus capex spending or going after new customers is a waste of time. (This is a bit glib but not that far from the truth).
Freight in the US optimizes for minimal crew hours. That means longer consists that no longer fit in sidings. Expanding sidings costs money and is thus verboten.
Even if the freight takes 3x as long to get somewhere they can have each crew take a leg then leave the train unattended. The railroad doesn't need to pay for overnight stays or overtime and only one or two crews are "active" in a given segment ever. Or to put it another way the limit is "we are paying for one crew on this segment of the line". Freight lines up on either side as that limit of 1xCrew shuttles whatever they can back and forth within that segment. Then you make the consists longer and longer to "buffer" the bottleneck.
I assume part of the "enforcement" issue is US DOT would need to order the railroad to back trains up or do other nonsensical things that would only create more chaos and delays because as I mentioned most consists can't fit on existing sidings anymore and AFAIK the law has no provision to order the railroads to extend the sidings nor order them to do the physically impossible.
> Think about it, why would cargo have a higher priority than human traffic?
My understanding was essentially it came down to who owned the tracks. More money in freight, more of it, hence priority given by private enterprise. The speculation is moot though.
My understanding is that most rail lines are privately owned. Is that incorrect as well?
> But a Bao-feng handheld that costs around $40 or so can work the local repeaters on 2m or 70cm and is a fine way to get started, learn the lingo, etc.
Baofeng makes a $25 radio that works on 2m/70cm and with repeaters. If you live in a place where there are hurricanes/earthquakes, there is no excuse to not have one charged up and ready to go. Getting the basic ham radio license is easy.
How does ham compare to meshtastic in a real emergency? Meshtastic has the advantage that it's license free and you don't have to try to convince people to spend days studying for it.
I have a license and a baofeng, but I don't know much of anything practical about emergency communications.
In an emergency you can make use of anything, including a radio without an amateur radio license. But it’s easier to use when you’ve had the practice and aren’t fumbling around learning about offsets and CTCSS tones. Or even better, when you have the repeaters preprogrammed into your radio.
Meshtastic is awesome, I have two T-echos. But it doesn’t compare to being able to whip out a handheld radio, tune into a nearby repeater and dial out with EchoLink to check in with my partner when I’m hiking.
Pre-COVID, our office building in Tokyo organized a disaster-preparation day every year. This was run by the building management team, which politely informed every corporate tenant in the office section that, yes, they would be participating.
Sure, we all knew when the drill would be so we could adjust our schedules, but
the actual alarms did sound, and the entire building evacuated, which included climbing down something like fifty flights of stairs with your emergency bag -- mandated by law in Japan -- in-hand, plus (optionally) using a fire extinguisher on a pretend fire after you got outside.
Sure, the extinguishers were just pressurized water, and you were spraying at a metal target, but you still had to pull the pin, squeeze, and aim, and they were at full pressure.
Was a good reminder that it's way better to have your first experience with stuff like a fire extinguisher happen under controlled conditions, as opposed to having to figure things out before your kitchen fire gets out-of-hand and burns down the house.
Same goes for radio, changing tires on a car with the provided jack, and so on.
Preparedness is 90% "knowing what to do" and 10% "having the right tools for the job".
“We don't rise to the level of our expectations, we fall to the level of our training.” Reading about it generates expectations, and they can be deadly.
On average we fall to the level of our training, but then there's moment to moment variation because of "human error" which has little to do with lack of skill or training, and more to do with individual and situational factors.
Training is critical, but even then you can still fail, which is why layers of backups are great.
For a lot of us, skill might never be as reliable as other layers, but it's generally different from other layers making it less likely to fail at the same time because of the same cause.
Crew Resource Management has a lot of great insights.
> In an emergency you can make use of anything, including a radio without an amateur radio license.
Just to clarify: the law in the US (47 CFR § 97.403) says that you can use amateur radio frequencies without a license, or unlicensed frequencies, for: "essential communication needs in connection with the immediate safety of human life and immediate protection of property when normal communication systems are not available". That's much narrower than just "in an emergency".
And if you try to use ham radio equipment without knowing what you're doing, there's a risk that you'll interfere with other amateur or non-amateur users who are coordinating their own emergency response.
Thank you for the clarification. I wanted my explanation to be generic enough to apply to any jurisdiction. For example, I’m in Canada where the regulations are differently worded but have a similar effect.
It's vastly better, if only because there are more ham radio users geared up, charged, and ready to listen and reply. Meshtastic is super cool and I have nothing bad to say about it. If my life were on the line, I'd much rather have a cheap Baofeng.
This is the correct answer. I have my license and help with Skywarn when I can in my area, also play around with meshtastic. The fact is that meshtastic is pretty cool, but the ham radio community has been around for a century, is far better organized and entrenched with various services, etc. There is far more trust and reliability there.
I look at it this way; meshtastic is for fun, but ham radio is for real work where results carry more weight.
Meshtastic is also still very much "beta" quality. Unless you spend a bit of time working with it, messing with different radios and antennas, you can end up with a setup that can't get much range at all, negating one of the main features of the mesh.
Though just buying a Baofeng can lead to similar results, as it's not that amazing at reception. In my testing I've only been able to get a good signal within a few hundred meters, which might not be enough to hit an area repeater except in ideal conditions.
Either way, having the knowledge and practice going into an emergency is much more helpful than just the equipment!
A lot of these medicines that require patients to inject themselves come in a self administrating auto-injector. There are really simple to use, I mean literally anyone can inject themselves, then throw the one-use auto-injector out.
Two things I took away from visiting Pompeii that I did not know from reading books and watch History Channel videos. Like you said, Pompeii was pretty large and it was covered with a lot of pumice and ash. There are a couple of places where the pumice and ash is 30 - 40 feet above the houses and all of that fell within a couple of days.
If someone in China starts harassing you or threatening you, just start sending messages that the two of you are conspiring to overthrow the Chinese government and the messages will stop real quick.
These Chinese mafia types talk tough until you start sending anti-Chinese government copy-pasta to them and they shut up real quick.
It's probably best not to declare war upon China in writing. Instead, ask how many students died in the 1989 Tiananmen massacre. That specific phrase should specifically auto-alert the censors to a known forbidden topic, without resorting to threats against China.
How long of a lost phone message can one set, anyways?
This will absolutely work. My friend is from China, but lives here in the US. Most of her friends and family are still back in China. We communicate primarily over iMessage, but also on WeChat. About 2 years ago I sent her a video about the Tiananmen Square protests over WeChat by mistake - I meant to send it over iMessage. The next day she called me, really mad; her WeChat account was shut down, without explanation, and she knew exactly why (my WeChat message). But what's worse is many of her WeChat contacts also had their accounts shut down - not all of them, just her closest or most frequent contacts, like her family and close friends. My account didn't get shut down.
The impacted accounts were magically re-enabled 3 days later. No email. No notification. Nothing. It was a clear message: We're watching, all of you.
> About 2 years ago I sent her a video about the Tiananmen Square protests over WeChat by mistake
Absolutely insane that you would even think to do this to a Chinese national. Good job they are in the US. Could have been far worse for their family back in China. Unbelievable.
We poke at one another about the Tiananmen Square protests because we have such different perspectives. Like me, she was in high school during that time, and was told the protests were minor, and that they were instigated and largely conducted by outsiders, like the US, seeking to overthrow the Chinese government. The reports of large-scale deaths is Western propaganda. She still more or less believes that story - she's been hearing it her whole life. We sometimes (rarely) exchange articles about the incident. I've always appreciated the back-and-forth because, even though it's a serious topic, we keep it lighthearted.
Anyway, she purchased her iPhone in the US. All her online accounts, except for WeChat, are associated to US-based services. Yeah, I fuucked up; I meant to send the message over iMessage, where we've never had a problem.
> Could have been far worse for their family back in China
what would they do, genuinely, to their family? Googling it only gives results about anything related to Tiananmen Square to be immediately censored, but little on the actual other consequences.
> The impacted accounts were magically re-enabled 3 days later.
A place I worked would lock your account if (reasons). I remember it happened to me - nonstandard mail client would try to use my old password a bunch of times and my account would lock.
most people would call in and get it unlocked immediately.
I came find out a little-known fact. The account lockout was automated and it would unlock after a certain amount of time. (of course using the wrong password again could lock it again)
This is a mystery. My guess is that the Chinese censorship system (The Great Firewall) knows my account is not associated to a Chinese National, so they don't care. Or, there could be legal restrictions/complications because I'm a US citizen. Who knows? I wouldn't be surprised if my little fuuck up didn't land me (or my WeChat account) on some sort of list, though.
They’re a nation-state with an international spy program, so that’s obviously a valid possibility, same as it is for lots of other non-China countries. I don’t have any specific data regarding your presented scenario with Canada and China, though. I do regardless stand by my general advice, but since it now has to be said, I am not your lawyer and this is not legal advice.
I would never write an unqualified "here" in a forum, which assumes that everyone will understand that I'm referring to the country where I'm sitting, which may be different from theirs.
You're effectively asking me whether I'm a complete idiot, or whether I mean here in HackerNews.
They don’t. I have tried this and other similar things such as sending images banned in China (but otherwise totally fine). Perhaps they weren’t in China I suppose.
In my (limited) experience private one on one messages are not censored. Or at least this was the case several years back... It's possible things are more strict now.
At least in my tests on Wechat you could discuss tiannanmen square or whatever you want with individuals. Some stickers were censored on Wechat and wouldn't show up. I think images as well may be don't get delivered.
Virtually all censorship and cases of people being arrested are when people talk about these things in large group chats (if a group chat has more than X amount of people it needs to be "registered"). My impression was it's a government fear of things going viral and controlling the public sphere and not about creating a panopticon/state-terrorism
Again.. This might be out of date, but this was at least the case for a long long time.
动态网自由门 天安門 天安门 法輪功 李洪志 Free Tibet 六四天安門事件 The Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 天安門大屠殺 The Tiananmen Square Massacre 反右派鬥爭 The Anti-Rightist Struggle 大躍進政策 The Great Leap Forward 文化大革命 The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution 人權 Human Rights 民運 Democratization 自由 Freedom 獨立 Independence 多黨制 Multi-party system 台灣 臺灣 Taiwan Formosa 中華民國 Republic of China 西藏 土伯特 唐古特 Tibet 達賴喇嘛 Dalai Lama 法輪功 Falun Dafa 新疆維吾爾自治區 The Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region 諾貝爾和平獎 Nobel Peace Prize 劉暁波 Liu Xiaobo 民主 言論 思想
