• 68 Posts
  • 7.78K Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 13th, 2023

help-circle



  • Flash was also cancer that ruined web pages.

    The reason Java Web Start wasn’t, was specifically because once you clicked on the link, it downloaded the app and started it as a real desktop application, with its own window and taskbar entry and whatnot. It didn’t rely on being embedded in HTML (I’m spefically not talking about Java applets, BTW – they sucked too) or manipulating the DOM for its UI; it could use Swing and have the same look and feel as a native application.


  • grue@lemmy.worldtome_irl@lemmy.worldme_irl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    9 hours ago

    I make this point at every opportunity:

    The “normal” working-class single-family neighborhoods in my city are zoned R4, with a 9000 sq.ft. minimum lot size. The rich neighborhoods are zoned R1, with a 2 acre minimum lot size. That means every R1 lot could fit at least nine R4 homes on it. Why do we have ridiculous shitty traffic on the freeway going past that rich neighborhood? Because every single one of those mansions physically displaced eight other households out into the suburbs, who could have otherwise lived there if the law wasn’t being (ab)used to subsidize the rich.

    And that’s just the difference between two kinds of single-family, let alone rezoning to allow the real level of density the market demands! If my city were zoned appropriately, the entire metro area population could be housed within the ring road.


    Don’t get me wrong: I’m not saying it’s “selfish” or wrong to want to live in a single-family home… just that you only deserve one if and only if you’re actually willing to pay for it. That means being willing to outbid multifamily developers who would build the lot out to its highest and best use, not hiding behind zoning to protect you from the free market.

    (I’m also not saying it isn’t selfish or wrong; I just try to stick to the geometric argument to deprive the person I’m debating of an excuse to turn it into an emotional debate.)







  • grue@lemmy.worldtome_irl@lemmy.worldme_irl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    12 hours ago

    The bottom line rebuttal to all the variants of the “but whatabout people who want to live in single-family houses” arguments is real simple: if it were truly that important to them, then they would be willing to pay fair-market rates for it. Which means artificially inflating the supply (thus subsidizing the price) via restrictive zoning laws wouldn’t be necessary.

    People who think they are entitled to live in single-family houses to the point that they want the law to forcibly impose that lifestyle on vast swathes of the population are just selfish takers who want society to subsidize them.