Personal computing discussed
Moderators: askfranklin, renee, emkubed, Captain Ned
Looking for Knowledge wrote:When drunk.....
I want to have sex, but find I am more likely to be shot down than when I am sober.
derFunkenstein wrote:Captain Ned wrote:Usacomp2k3 wrote:For me there has to be an IKEA less than an hour away.
My closest IKEA is in another country.
Would you get hit with import fees from Canada?
Heiwashin wrote:The best rush hour has consistently been st Louis. The only problem there, if someone gets a flat tire, they'll shut down 2 or 3 Lanes out of 5 for it, no exaggeration.
Usacomp2k3 wrote:It's also flat with no major rivers. For example, the population numbers are similar to Seattle, but Seattle proper is sandwiched between Puget Sound and Lake Washington, and when you get too far East you run into mountains and forests. Makes for a beautiful city, but getting around is a nightmare.Heiwashin wrote:Because it is such a transportation hub, I've heard the intentional layout of various highways and rail lines makes it travel better than most for it's size.Weve had a terminal in various parts of Indianapolis for a while. As far as cities go, it probably rates a B- on rush hour congestion compared to Dallas, ny City, Chicago all getting a F
just brew it! wrote:Unfortunately for Chicago, geography makes a beltway impossible so a lot of traffic ends up funneling through the city center on I-90/I-94/I-290/I-55. And then there's the "Hillside Strangler" interchange just to the west of the city, where I-290, I-294, and I-88 all intersect... the ramps were reconfigured in the early 2000s so the traffic in that area is now merely awful, as opposed to the near-24x7 raging dumpster fire it was previously.
The Egg wrote:Thankfully I wasn't doing much expressway driving back then. Nowadays, the worst stretch seems to be 90/94 from the circle out until 294. I generally just completely avoid it, but I'm not sure what the deal is there, or why they haven't been able to figure out a solution.
DancinJack wrote:The Egg wrote:Thankfully I wasn't doing much expressway driving back then. Nowadays, the worst stretch seems to be 90/94 from the circle out until 294. I generally just completely avoid it, but I'm not sure what the deal is there, or why they haven't been able to figure out a solution.
2+ million people will do that.
just brew it! wrote:Even if they could, it wouldn't help. Building wider roads to fix traffic jams doesn't work.DancinJack wrote:It's basically hemmed in on both sides for the vast majority of that stretch. Can't really make it any wider than it is.2+ million people will do that.
superjawes wrote:just brew it! wrote:DancinJack wrote:2+ million people will do that.
It's basically hemmed in on both sides for the vast majority of that stretch. Can't really make it any wider than it is.
Even if they could, it wouldn't help. Building wider roads to fix traffic jams doesn't work.
superjawes wrote:just brew it! wrote:Even if they could, it wouldn't help. Building wider roads to fix traffic jams doesn't work.DancinJack wrote:It's basically hemmed in on both sides for the vast majority of that stretch. Can't really make it any wider than it is.2+ million people will do that.
The Egg wrote:superjawes wrote:just brew it! wrote:Even if they could, it wouldn't help. Building wider roads to fix traffic jams doesn't work.It's basically hemmed in on both sides for the vast majority of that stretch. Can't really make it any wider than it is.
I disagree with the logic in those studies. If adding lanes doesn't improve traffic, then the inverse should be true --- that reducing lanes doesn't make traffic worse.
The Egg wrote:The reality is that lack of bandwidth on an expressway simply pushes the traffic burden onto the adjacent surface streets (or possibly other nearby expressways). If they just look at a single expressway in a vacuum and say "We increased capacity by 11 percent, and traffic subsequently increased by 11 percent, therefore it didn't help", they're missing the big picture. Traffic was relieved from other areas, and they also likely still aren't meeting demand.
The Egg wrote:You might want to take a closer look at the article, because they do address this:I disagree with the logic in those studies. If adding lanes doesn't improve traffic, then the inverse should be true --- that reducing lanes doesn't make traffic worse. The reality is that lack of bandwidth on an expressway simply pushes the traffic burden onto the adjacent surface streets (or possibly other nearby expressways).
Wired wrote:And this does make sense if you've been reading the DYMT responses to traffic. We've got plenty of people talking about how they don't like traffic, so if they perceive an area to be a mess, they are much more likely to avoid it entirely, keeping the demand in line with supply.Interestingly, the effect works in reverse, too. Whenever some city proposes taking lanes away from a road, residents scream that they’re going to create a huge traffic snarl. But the data shows that nothing truly terrible happens. The amount of traffic on the road simply readjusts and overall congestion doesn’t really increase.
For instance, Paris in recent decades has had a persistent policy to dramatically downsize and reduce roadways. “Driving in Paris was bad before,” said Duranton. “It’s just as bad, but it’s not much worse.”
The Egg wrote:I think what's really being said is that is that increasing a road's capacity to serve the existing traffic need is flawed logic because it assumes that no new drivers will be added to the equation. In order to get the desired effect, you have to increase the capacity of the road while simultaneously preventing additional drivers from using it. That would reduce congestion (because the demand says constant while supply increases), but it's not been the practice.If they just look at a single expressway in a vacuum and say "We increased capacity by 11 percent, and traffic subsequently increased by 11 percent, therefore it didn't help", they're missing the big picture. Traffic was relieved from other areas, and they also likely still aren't meeting demand.
DancinJack wrote:https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4485197/windows-10-mobile-end-of-support-faq
lol
derFunkenstein wrote:That's gotta be the dumbest question you could possibly ask.
ludi wrote:derFunkenstein wrote:We need to work on your people skills, Daria.That's gotta be the dumbest question you could possibly ask.
ludi wrote:derFunkenstein wrote:That's gotta be the dumbest question you could possibly ask.
We need to work on your people skills, Daria.
derFunkenstein wrote:ludi wrote:derFunkenstein wrote:That's gotta be the dumbest question you could possibly ask.
We need to work on your people skills, Daria.
My people skills are fine usually.
Also, somebody suggest a dumber question related to this topic and I'll withdraw the statement.
Looking for Knowledge wrote:When drunk.....
I want to have sex, but find I am more likely to be shot down than when I am sober.
Looking for Knowledge wrote:When drunk.....
I want to have sex, but find I am more likely to be shot down than when I am sober.
Captain Ned wrote:ludi wrote:derFunkenstein wrote:We need to work on your people skills, Daria.That's gotta be the dumbest question you could possibly ask.
Daria?
Heiwashin wrote:Just incase you want to see two trucks high five. This was at the baltimore maryland ports. As usual, you can tell it's my video by the reflection of many drones in th
Usacomp2k3 wrote:Heiwashin wrote:Just incase you want to see two trucks high five. This was at the baltimore maryland ports. As usual, you can tell it's my video by the reflection of many drones in th
We hate shipping out of Baltimore.
Looking for Knowledge wrote:When drunk.....
I want to have sex, but find I am more likely to be shot down than when I am sober.
Looking for Knowledge wrote:When drunk.....
I want to have sex, but find I am more likely to be shot down than when I am sober.
DancinJack wrote:I think all the regulars (Ben and myself included since we're the "young" ones) are old enough to remember Daria!
Heiwashin wrote:Usacomp2k3 wrote:Heiwashin wrote:Just incase you want to see two trucks high five. This was at the baltimore maryland ports. As usual, you can tell it's my video by the reflection of many drones in th
We hate shipping out of Baltimore.
All of the ports are terrible for various reasons. I'm not a fan either but we send a lot of stuff overseas.
