|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:Rock existed before Pitchfork so I'm pretty sure it's free to continue after it. If Pitchfork isn't writing as much about rock as they used to maybe it's because it's not as popular a genre anymore. Sorry the mere existence of black talent caused an end to the service your whiteness feels entitled to though. I don't know how you could be a fan of rock music without acknowledging that, far from killing it, black people are mostly responsible for it existing in the first place, but I suppose this dunce has shown it's indeed possible.
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2017 04:04
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 22:19 |
|
|
I went to a party at a crazy person's house once and I swear there was poo poo and knicknacks covering every loving surface in the goddamn house. I have no idea how anyone lives like that, it would drive me mad. It wasn't even untidy, which is something that can happen to my place out of sheer laziness -- there was a distinct feeling that everything was very much in the place it was intended to be.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2017 19:13
|
|
|
Why not provide a free-market solution to the parking problem by increasing the cost of parking until there's always some availability out of the present on-street spaces?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2017 16:21
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:But that just means that parking's only available to people who can afford the high fees, regardless of how much they need it. A poor person used to have at least the chance of getting lucky and finding a space, but now they're shut out of parking entirely. They're also shut out of driving, because driving is really expensive anyway, and putting the squeeze on some middle-class folks that suddenly can't park wherever they like without paying an arm and a leg would seem like a way to increase support and funding for public transit. The sky-high parking costs in our downtown (around $650/month for covered parking, and there are waitlists for monthly parking) have been great for building support and usership of public transit and alternative modes of transportation. Now it's largely affluent suburbanites (who can afford those parking costs) that bitch about the "war on cars," while everyone else uses bikes or public transit -- even people with decent middle-class incomes. It's sure to be rough in the short term, but long term I think it helps spur more balanced development patterns. It would also be great to use the funds from expensive on-street parking as a funding source for public transit, which can obviously always use more money.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2017 18:41
|
|
|
xrunner posted:Your energy needs to be focused on improving transit, then! Not on making parking more convenient for suburbanites. There are, of course, reasons that poor people might need to visit "downtown" and need short-term onstreet parking, so it's not entirely a baseless concern. But, yeah, improving transit really is the most important thing for everyone. It increases mobility options for everyone (but especially poor people, including those too poor to afford a car at all), decreases drunk driving, cuts carbon emissions, and once it gets to a certain point, it's also more convenient than driving.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2017 18:54
|
|
|
BENGHAZI 2 posted:they dont have control over streetside parking though? citation: i used to have to park streetside when i worked at a restaurant Sure they do, it's called "if I see your car parked streetside outside the restaurant, where our customers want to be able to park, you're fired." Besides which, don't most cities have time limits on streetside parking which render them unusable for people working a whole shift? Here in downtown, the longest you can possibly find is 3 hours, and most are either 2 hour or 30 minutes max.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2017 19:33
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:If I had a magic no-political-obstacles wand I'd make it illegal to own a home in an urban core that's not your primary residence. Shelter's a human necessity, not an investment vehicle. How would there be any space for people to rent if people cannot own property they aren't living in? I agree with you in concept, that it's bad to have empty dwellings at all, but especially in desirable areas, but it's not too easy to solve. You could impose a punitive tax on any unoccupied dwelling, but then you have the issue of how to define "occupation" and how to determine if a given dwelling is occupied or not.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
fishmech v. Tiny Brotosaurus.... * lights cigarette, opens beer * You're both good posters 90% of the time but goddamn can y'all be crazy as gently caress the other 10% of the time
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2017 05:00
|
|
|
Tehdas posted:I'd suspect this effect is not as pronounced in areas with widespread public transport. In areas where it is scare it will be valuable. I'd be interested in seeing a map of either rents or property prices in a city with a large, established public transit network, like London, Madrid, Moscow, NYC, etc. My personal feeling is that proximity to a subway station still commands a significant premium, but that the radius of that effect is smaller. What I mean is that you'd still expect flats right next to a metro station, as well as commercial rents, would be quite high, but places 1km or more away would basically return to the mean -- whereas in a city with limited public transportation, the radius of that effect could be 2-3km much more easily. I admit this is just my personal feeling and I haven't bothered to try backing it up with data.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2017 15:08
|
|
|
Cicero posted:I mean even if good transit comes by your house, when it gets extended elsewhere that means more places you can go. This also speaks to a zoning problem. If you're building large amounts of residential with few businesses, and then hooking it up to transit, that's not helping anyone except the people who live there. If you ensure transit-focused development has a good mixture of retail space, office space, professional buildings, restaurants, bars, etc., then all of a sudden that good transit system can take people already living on a transit line to a new place they might want to go. A large problem with how transit is designed in Calgary is it's very much meant as a system to take people in and out of downtown. Essentially all of the bus lines and train lines go from a neighbourhood into the core, so it's difficult to use transit as a way of actually getting around the city from point to point.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2017 16:05
|
|
|
Great Metal Jesus posted:But eventually public transport will make its way to THE POORS and then they can take the train to your neighborhood with their booze and their weeds and steal your television. Yeah, here too, while arguing against a bus rapid transit expansion. These people are so sheltered they've obviously never even tried bringing a large thing they've bought on the bus with them.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2017 16:10
|
|
|
Cicero posted:I mean it can also alleviate pressure on roads and let others visit friends they may have in the area. But I agree with your wider point, better to zone to allow retail/commercial space near transit hubs outside the city core too. As I expanded on, another big problem is if you have a hub-and-spoke model, which I would think is reasonably common, even that's difficult unless you live downtown. It's minimum three "segments" some of which only run every 30 to 60 minutes. With two segments you can easily time a connection, but more than that and things start getting dicey. One thing I liked about Montreal was, apart from the metro system, a lot of the buses seemed to go up and down arterial roads instead of serving specific communities. That was a good system because it took advantage of the grid system, rather than a lovely hub-and-spoke model.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2017 16:19
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:The eight-hour workday was a massive labor victory backed up by research that shows huge drops in productivity and quality of life when workers go over that amount. Overtime pay is a disincentive to the antisocial and counterproductive act of overworking employees. Allowing loopholes like that erodes the fabric of society and that's why states with strong labor laws don't allow it. I think there's a certain benefit to allowing modifications to a default overtime structure, which would theoretically involve employees receiving some other benefit in exchange for working longer shifts at normal pay. In practice, this obviously doesn't work out because in the absence of an effective union, employees do not have sufficient power to negotiate a mutually beneficial arrangement. One of my friends "abuses" the gently caress out of his overtime structure, which sees him paid normally but allowed to bank those overtime hours as time off. If it were strictly regulated that such an arrangement couldn't be made, he'd be worse off for it. He was also working in a fly-in fly-out reserve for a few years, so uninterrupted stretches of time off were way more important to him than getting time and a half for overtime in a place where there's near nothing to do if you aren't working. As always, flexibility will benefit some and hurt others. This is a good argument in favour of strong, effective unions, so that the flexibility can be maintained but used for the benefit of workers instead of used exclusively to gently caress them around.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2017 22:09
|
|
|
NerdyMcNerdNerd posted:They've done a great job of gutting every union that isn't centered on a trade with a labor bottleneck of some kind. Oh, agreed 100%. lovely ineffective unions are a cancer, because they devalue the concept of unionization in general in addition to doing nothing beneficial for workers. I'm saying that, in limited circumstances, greater flexibility in the letter of the law when it comes to employment regulations can be mutually beneficial for employers and employees, but it has to be balanced by a union that negotiates strongly and effectively on behalf of the employees. Unions in North America are in a relatively sorry state for the most part, so I don't know it's a feasible option to depend on them to any degree.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2017 01:08
|
|
|
BirdOfPlay posted:Worth noting that that is illegal in the States. FLSA requires time-and-a-half pay, but, back in May, Congress was trying to change that. Well, I assume it's not in Canada. And if it is, he's basically in the employ of the federal government regardless, so I'm guessing he would not have much of a chance of changing anything. He also has the option of having those hours paid out as overtime, instead of banking them for time off -- if that makes a difference. That's apparently what most of his co-workers choose, but he prefers being able to gently caress off for a few months at a time and do whatever he wants.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2017 01:22
|
|
|
Fast food brands like McDonald's trying to market food that isn't "poo poo" is a fool's errand. If I want a "good" hamburger, I can find it at any number of places to which I have no brand loyalty, or I can easily prepare one myself because it's literally a thing a 10 year old could do. If I want exactly a Big Mac or a McMuffin, with everything just so, the easiest thing is just to go to McDonald's. That's a strength in my opinion, not a weakness. I love my home-made hamburgers, with everything lovingly seasoned and prepared, aged cheddar melted on top and placed on a really good-quality bun, but I also love a Big Mac. I don't see them as competing products, if that makes any sense. Trying to dilute the brand works against that, as I see it. I'm sure someone will tell me why I'm wrong and crazy, but it's not like the current strategy of selling salads and whatnot has worked a treat for them.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2017 01:56
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:That's actually good to know. I'm happy to support local farmers but will actually go out of my way to avoid "organic" anything. Yeah, in my experience produce quality depends more on shipping distance and production scale, so buying from smaller, local farms will often get you a superior product, regardless of whether or not it's certified organic (many small farms are organic, but cannot afford actual certification, because it's just another lovely, big industry that exists to entrench established interests). It's probably still not the most efficient form of agriculture, but the quality difference is enough to convince me. Tomatoes and garlic are where I notice the biggest improvement with local farm produce compared to other stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2017 16:25
|
|
|
It's also dependent on absolute humidity vs. relative humidity. I'm not sure how that affect various foods, but the RH in a fridge can be quite high while the absolute humidity is low because cold air can't hold as much moisture.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2017 19:48
|
|
|
Submarine Sandpaper posted:The best thing you can do for a lot of your meat is to salt and let it hang out on the bottom shelf for about a day. Yeah I love meat that's had all the moisture drawn out of it, that's the best!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2017 19:50
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:Literally it is, man. The salt's on the surface, it doesn't actually dehydrate the entire piece of meat because that's not how things work. Dry-aging meat makes it delicious. Dry-aging is indeed delicious (as is cured meat) but that's not the same as salting a steak and leaving it in the bottom of the fridge for a day. I shouldn't have been so snarky, but it's highly dependent on the cut of meat you're using and how you intend to prepare it.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2017 20:31
|
|
|
Also gently caress his hatred of single-task devices. A garlic press may be a single-task device, but it's a gently caress sight quicker to press a few cloves of garlic than crush and mince them with a knife, and I do it a few times a week.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2017 04:13
|
|
|
ReidRansom posted:Eh, I think a lot of that is just to show people what they can do with basic tools and get them into the kitchen without making them think they need a lot of crazy equipment. And that's fine, the show was meant to be educational. True. The only thing I couldn't avoid buying beyond basic kitchen equipment was a food processor to make smooth, lovely soups properly. Though, I'll be completely honest: rolling pasta with a rolling pin loving eats rear end. I have neither the space to store, nor an attachment point for, a pasta machine, but drat if I don't want one every time I make pasta by hand.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2017 04:58
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Apparently, Jeff Bezos just became the richest man in the world today. Also of note is Amencio Ortega, co-founder of Inditex (parent company of Zara, among others) who is said to be worth $82 billion. That's manufacturing in addition to retail, but still worthy of mentioning.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
OhFunny posted:My girlfriend purchased her tea from there. She won't be happy about this. Luckily for her there are like a billion places you can buy (better) loose tea from for a fraction of the price!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2017 04:57
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:A local tea chain had a tea called "Serenity Now" and I made a Seinfeld joke when I got some and the 20-somethings working there didn't get it at all HOOCHIE MAMA!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2017 22:52
|
|
|
Avalanche posted:I've always wanted to make my own latte's but I could never find anything equivalent to the steam wand on a $24k Starbucks super gently caress off industrial sized machine. Do such things now exist independent of an espresso machine attachment? Not really. To heat and dispense the steam, you'd already need around 80% of the parts of a cheap espresso machine, so no one bothers making a standalone steam wand, as far as I know. There are "milk frothers" that sort of do a similar thing once you've already heated up the milk some other way, but it's not quite the same thing.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2017 13:41
|
|
|
Neon Noodle posted:Gehry can't design a building that works anyplace that gets colder than 40F. This seems to be a recurring problem for architects. I'm looking your way, Santiago Calatrava. Dude couldn't even design a bridge that worked in low temperatures properly, much less a building.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2017 18:45
|
|
|
I'm going to have my house turned into a mausoleum for me so that I can enjoy pride of ownership for all eternity.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2017 22:52
|
|
|
I wear 100% cotton stuff pretty frequently and I've never needed softener. Yeah, it's a little rougher than viscose or whatever, but not enough to be irritating.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2017 00:02
|
|
|
If you're a white man, you can get away with wearing pretty much whatever you want provided your dick and balls aren't visible. For everyone else, it's a lot more complicated and the consequences for getting it "wrong" according to some arbitrary standard are anything from a lack of professional advancement, or people laughing at you, all the way up to literally being shot to death.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2017 22:32
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:A discount men's outfitters will get you suitably comfortable shirt and pants for most weathers but your sympathy would be better placed with the poor lass stuck in some hellish plastic blazer and nylons all day. Yeah, I think, with regards to my generation and certainly me personally, we don't feel comfortable wearing suits because it seems ridiculously overdressed and formal compared to what we've been conditioned to wear and perceive as normal. There is nothing uncomfortable or unpleasant about wearing a suit, it just seems slightly abnormal until you're used to it. Wearing a great suit with a nice shirt and a tie, in a context where everyone is doing it and you're not forced to be there like at work, is fun as gently caress and perfectly comfortable if you buy well-fitting clothes. You just feel like a pillock when everyone around you is wearing a ratty rear end t-shirt and jeans or shorts or whatever, and I think especially when you're just transitioning from school/university to work, it can feel a bit like you're cosplaying an adult or something. I have a great pair of formal-ish trousers made of a material that feels like a light breeze touching my skin, but I never wear them because I feel ridiculous walking around outside when everyone else is wearing jeans, like people will make fun of me for looking like some kind of stuck up prick or whatever (possibly irrational, but... what are you gonna do?). But I share your hatred of dress shoes. gently caress all dress shoes permanently. I don't get why shoes have to be uncomfortable and dig into my ankle bone continuously in order to be considered dressy. EDIT: My point being: guys overall are lucky as gently caress. Our business attire fits well, is generic as gently caress, and feels pretty good to wear while providing decent insulation in cold weather. We have nothing to bitch about. PT6A fucked around with this message at 01:39 on Aug 26, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2017 01:34
|
|
|
Haifisch posted:I'm pretty sure womens' jeans exist to subsidize the tailoring industry. Some brands do, some brands do not. Notably, Zara doesn't have separate waist/leg measurements, but I'm lucky because I fit their default well enough. Still, I gather there is significantly less variation between men's waist sizes and leg lengths than women's.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2017 01:41
|
|
|
Noctone posted:If it makes you feel the tiniest bit better, men's clothing in the designer tier suffers from the same problems. Also the one time I bought really expensive (over $100) jeans, they were all super long (like, too long for 99% of people to wear) and it was completely assumed you'd have them hemmed. I see the point, as it's a cheap fix and easier than stocking a bunch of jeans with the same waist and different inseams, for something of a niche market.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2017 04:22
|
|
|
Crow Jane posted:I recently bought a couch online (after admiring and sleeping on the same model while visiting a friend), and have been getting ads for the exact same couch ever since. It's nice and all, but I'm not sure what I'd do with two of them. Ironically, I might actually click on an ad that had coordinating rugs or chairs or whatever, but nope, apparently what I need is a backup couch. Wayfair is so poo poo for this. "You bought a table, eh? Clearly you must be the sort of person that buys two tables a month -- here's a bunch of different tables, as well as the table you just bought!!!! Have you considered buying more tables? Continue to buy tables until literally every part of your home is filled with tables and you have to walk on all your different tables! Then start stacking some tables!" Go away, Wayfair. I'm not that into you.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2017 17:02
|
|
|
the black husserl posted:Why would anyone hate putting effort into your craft or trying unique new flavors? Why do you have to defend yourself for going to a donut shop? I think most of the hate is when places like that act like they invented the idea of hand-making baked goods, like it's some sort of wondrous discovery. It really depends on the establishment and the attitude they put across.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
baquerd posted:YouTube will chain a million toy videos and unboxings and everything else their little hearts desire. Yeah, in fact kids today probably have more ways of knowing which toys they want than ever before, since they aren't going purely by what it looks like in a box or does on a TV commercial.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2017 23:10
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:The best thing about retail is that you can try clothes on in the shop to get an idea of your fit in that brand, and then go home and order everything online because they only had jeans that fit you in lime green. Hahaha, this is so true. This is like a law of nature. "Yes, of course we only stock things in styles people won't actually want to buy because they are hideous and fit like garbage! Why aren't people shopping here????" While bitching about clothes shopping: I skip leg day all the loving time and skinny jeans are sometimes so skinny I can't fit my loving legs in them. Who's buying those jeans? Who can possibly fit in them?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2017 17:33
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:~300 for a 5x7 indoor rug, low-pile wool. I'd go up to 500 for something spectacular. All I can find is tacky chevron or lattice print synthetic rugs locally at that price range. Thank you! Have you checked wayfair? Their lovely ads will pursue you to the ends of the earth, the prices aren't amazing, and the shipping can be slow, but they carry a lot of poo poo and have really, really good filtering controls compared to Amazon.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2017 18:42
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:Yes, it was a browser-crashing nightmare of teal plastic rugs in knockoff Hollywood Regency patterns. I'll give you it was better than Amazon though. Yeah, it's pretty brutal but I still prefer it to shopping for furniture and home decor locally. I mean, who doesn't have $1600 to spend on a dining table and then $400 apiece on some lovely chairs, right???
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2017 18:49
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 22:19 |
|
|
If you can't be the unquestioned greatest at recreation, then really what is the point?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2017 21:29
|
|