Public transist in LA is akin to mild torture. I feel for those who have to take it every day for work.
Aside from the haphazard and oblique bus scheduling routes, the ride itself is jarring and agnozing. Unnecessary repeated montoned annoucements bombard your trip with sudden jerking stops.
Of course, the homeless and drug addicted use the bus and trains for temporary shelter. The train has even more mind numbing announcements with a ridiculous annoucement system that could be replaced by screens.
And if you want to go anywhere beyond one bus route, your trip time will be 3 to 4 times that of driving.
We're supposed to commend those who take public transist, but the City of LA doesn't care. Corrupt, incompetent, indifferent -- whatever it is, they don't have a clue what they are doing.
The audio announcements are also for people who can't see the screens, due to blindness or just people in the way. They're typically repeated so you don't miss what was said. It's potentially annoying for frequent riders but most people just wear headphones if they know where they're getting off.
The homelessness thing is a much bigger problem. Shelters are always full, and even if you do have a job, rent is totally out of control, and the wait for section 8 housing is >a decade in some places. It's not surprising that people end up on the streets, and yet rich people in this country want to further cut back on social safety nets while offering ever more subsidy to the wealthy. https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/05/09/magazine/how-homeowner... discuses this.
I agree, but there's a range of people who live in their cars. Some cause destruction, trash and probably aren't employed or trying to work in a legitimate way. Hard drug use, crime etc are all likely.
America should be helping fight for a world where we don't need fish police. In other words, we should encourage governments that naturally want to act in a reasonable, secular-based manner.
I'm not directly responding to your comment but some of the best sushi chefs use fish that was frozen. And this says all sushi served in the US has to be freezed to kill any bacteria-
For those that don't click through, the only exception is tuna. It lives deep enough in the ocean and is clean enough to get around the "must be frozen" rule.
Good comment but I wouldn't suggest saying you look like you are from someplace far away. Just sticking with the standard where you are from is good.
Better to have traveled out of the country a few times so you can relate.
Best advice is to talk about doing something. This art museum, this meetup, this new great restaurant. "Oh join me and my other friends. Or let's go explore together." You can kind of bluff your way through this even if you have no other friends (go find them!).
I agree. The "you look like you are ..." requires the other person to either affirm that they look conspicuously different than their peers or to refute the asker's claim that they look different, which could be embarrassing for both.
Generally, I try to avoid comments on a person's appearance unless I'm pretty good friends with that person, even if it's something relatively benign like "you like my friend, Pat" or "you like $celebrity".
Edit: of course, "where are you from?" could be perceived as a patronizing way to point out that the other person looks different. Socializing is hard.
"You look like you are from far away" will offend lots of minorities, because it smells of racism.
> He asks what many have asked before: “Where are you from?” I tell him Miami. He laughs and says, “No, but really. Where are you from from?” He mentions something about my features, my thin nose, and then trails off. I tell him my family is from Eritrea, a country in the Horn of Africa, next to Ethiopia. He looks relieved. “I knew it,” he says. “You’re not black.” I say that of course I am. “None more black,” I weakly joke. “Not really,” he says. “You’re African, not black-black. Blacks don’t hike.”
In such a scenario, most people will happily bust out the self-deprecation and say "Well, nowhere interesting, but I did go to <interesting_semi-local_place>." Even an hour road trip to somewhere offbeat can be interesting enough for conversation.
>> "Well, nowhere interesting, but I did go to <interesting_semi-local_place>."
Yes, but they may internally feel quite embarrassed saying they went to Rancho San Antonio when others are harping about snorkeling in the Great Barrier Reef and wrestling bears and seeing the Northern Lights.
I'd say his arguments appear clear and convincing, even to a skeptic like myself. I wonder what can be done to counter his seemingly perfect narrative so Americans can be rightfully concerned about what's happening.
To be clear, I don't believe Hayden, he is likely lying about aspects of it, these systems will inevitably be used in the future for regular law enforcement purposes and the previous abuses by NSA staff is understated. Plus, it is unequivocally illegal and a violation of natural rights. And just a bad idea which will lead to a dangerous future.
> I wonder what can be done to counter his seemingly perfect narrative so Americans can be rightfully concerned about what's happening.
I think that a) redefining common terms to mean idiosyncratic things and b) using the idiosyncratic terms in public to imply their original common meaning is enough to trigger a warning to the layperson against putting too much stock in a particular speaker's narrative. I can say from experience that people tend to perk up when you give them such a warning.
Also, Sam Harris isn't particularly well-versed in the issues surrounding wide-net surveillance. Add Bruce Schneier or Dan Bernstein to the discussion and that "seemingly perfect narrative" will start to look very different.
The video clip seemed unusually harsh. The reporter said he'd announced the Hyperloop to "thrill and confuse"? Followed by several skeptical tones and questions all while contrasting it with saying he'd done things no one else had.
Aren't cops supposed to be a neutral party? Shouldn't they have inquired what was happening and tried to find all possible ways to communicate without force?
Cops in the US seem way too ready to snap into a confrontation. They could have spent 30 minutes discussing with the guy and it would had caused less disruption and delay to the other passengers.
This concept of a comply or die mentality is a real problem.
Do we not know how much discussion happened before the video was taken? The man was already asked to deplane multiple times and he aggressively refused.
The first thing Trump was supposed to do was introduce an Amendment for term limits (Washington Post). Cruz proposed one that would limit Senators to 2 terms and Representatives to 3 terms.
This seems like an idea almost everyone would support and would do so much to move politics forward.
But it needs to be passed by the current people there
All 27 Amendments have been ratified after two-thirds
of the House and Senate approve of the proposal and
send it to the states for a vote. Then, three-fourths
of the states must affirm the proposed Amendment.
First step is to get Congress on board, and telling them to vote themselves out is unlikely.
Eh. We have term limits in California. Hasn't done much good. And those terms seem kinda short. Once someone figures out what they're doing, they're almost termed out.
Aside from the haphazard and oblique bus scheduling routes, the ride itself is jarring and agnozing. Unnecessary repeated montoned annoucements bombard your trip with sudden jerking stops.
Of course, the homeless and drug addicted use the bus and trains for temporary shelter. The train has even more mind numbing announcements with a ridiculous annoucement system that could be replaced by screens.
And if you want to go anywhere beyond one bus route, your trip time will be 3 to 4 times that of driving.
We're supposed to commend those who take public transist, but the City of LA doesn't care. Corrupt, incompetent, indifferent -- whatever it is, they don't have a clue what they are doing.