I've been biking to work in Los Angeles for ten years and it's surely been one of my best life hacks ever (to the point where access to biking infrastructure has been a primary consideration when buying my house).
I know a bike mechanic who commutes by bicycle (of course) in a city. I brought up bike infrastructure and they said they don't need much: side streets that are too slow for cars going any distance are perfect 'bike lanes' - either there are no cars or it's one lane of slow cars and the bike fits in fine. All they need to do is figure out a route, but usually they can find their way the first time without a map.
LA is notoriously car-oriented, but is it different in that respect?
The secret of LA biking infrastructure is that there are a few small rivers / creeks / storm drains running towards the ocean and sometimes those have bike trails.
Those are really next level because they are essentially bike freeways; completely separated from car traffic (no intersections because the river & bike trail go underneath road bridges).
In fact, it's not only safe and fun, but also much faster than driving during rush hour.
I spend 10-20 hours/wk on the bike and I personally hate almost all bike infrastructure. I understand why it exists, and I'm pro it being built but personally miss me with that shit. I hate the separated bike lane more than anything, even practicing parallel bunny hops every ride it still sketches me the fuck out to be trapped in a little channel like that. I'd much rather swim in traffic, and have all the options that that gives me.
Side streets are often designed specifically to make thru traffic difficult. They have dead ends, weird routes, etc.
But yeah, when you can find an empty/slow side street it’s hundreds of times better than a bike lane right next to high speed traffic and cars cutting you off.
Still, many of those things don't limit bikes nearly as much - one way streets, alleys and parks, etc. Even a section of road under construction can be bypassed on the sidewalk.
I've been cycling to work for more than a decade in a more bike friendly city than LA (presumably), but still a city. What worries me a bit is the impact on my lungs. A doctor friend once told me they could easily tell the country person from the city dweller from looking at their lungs.
Apart from that it is a net positive for me and I wouldn't stop. You have to die one death they say and if it is lung cancer or COPD for me, so be it.
Amazon solved trust is very much different than my perception of them:
- ads everywhere trying to push low quality product
- fake/bought product reviews
- commingled inventory (up until recently, still I would never buy food items, drugs or other health sensitive items like air filters or sunscreen there)
> That's why I had kept my pixel 4a for years until is finally kicked the bucket 2 years ago.
RIP I'm sure it was a noble device. My Pixel 3a is currently my wireless router for very German reasons. I worry this will kill off the still-decent battery life, as has happened with my OG Pixel.
I have since allied myself with what I personally consider the devil of consumer electronics just to stay on this boat.
I recently upgraded my 4a to a 10 two months ago. Besides getting security updates again, it feels like a downgrade in every way that matters to me.
Can't lie flat due to camera bulge. No headphone jack. Fingerprint sensor on the front that screen protectors interfere with. No sim slot. Ai bullshit triggers if i keep my thumb to close to where you touch to switch apps. Ai bullshit also replaces the old power menu, which now requires a combo button press.
Well if you care about democracy, they are the only power that can arguably undermine it, not just at home, but worldwide (tiktok, fueling division, funding antidemocratic parties like Germany's AfD).
Further, look into their support of Russia in their war of conquest against Ukraine, the treatment of their neighbors like the Philippines and look into what their fishing fleet is up to worldwide.
To be clear, I'm not arguing in favor of the current administration. In fact, I would argue that they have a similar "might makes right" mindset to the CCP and should be opposed on the same grounds.
If anything, foreign adversaries like China or Russia welcome / help to power parties like the current administration so democracies self destruct.
And I'm saying this has nothing to do with moral goods like democracy. The US has toppled plenty of democracies and killed millions of innocent people for its own benefit. "Might makes right" is what we always practiced. The current administration just doesn't care to hide it.
This has everything to do with maintaining economic and military superiority. That's the reason why people consider China a "adversary" not morality. If you don't understand this you won't understand why such a huge percentage of the world's population is wary of the USA just like they are wary of China.
The US is far from perfect, but - so far, TBD where we go from here - has had IMHO a net positive influence on keeping democracy around (specifically, I'm thinking of Germany after WW2, Western Europe during the Cold War, Japan and with detours South Korea).
Perhaps you'll point out that the US did this out of pure self-interest and these countries are just vassal states to the US. However, a useful comparison in this context is comparing Western Germany (US) to Eastern Germany (Russia), South Korea (US) to North Korea (China) or, say, Poland (US/EU) to Belarus (Russia) to assess which sphere of influence (and its implications on national self-determination) is preferable.
Going back to democracy, in my view is not the "default state" of human society (the default is probably mob rule like we have in Russia).
> That's the reason why people consider China a "adversary" not morality.
I personally view Russia and China as adversaries because they are a serious threat to democracy worldwide (that I think we agree on?), which I believe is the very thing we're discussing.
So in summary, there are very good reasons to be critical of China (CCP) independent of the current US administrations actions and historical baggage of the US.
Your examples of the US doing good for democracy is correct. My examples of the US doing bad and dismantling democracy for its own benefit is also correct. The US has been fantastic for its own people and its allies. Not so for others. Please note that 85% of the world population lies outside.
But all your examples are vs Russia. I will be happy if Russia is dismantled. Both the Soviet Union and Russia has been terrible for its people. China has been absolutely fantastic for its people. They went from absolute poverty to challenging the greatest empire the world has ever seen in just a few decades. I doubt the Chinese people hate their regime.
> to assess which sphere of influence (and its implications on national self-determination) is preferable
Iran, Guatemala, Brazil, etc. All had democratic govt's overthrown by the US.
> I personally view Russia and China as adversaries because they are a serious threat to democracy worldwide (that I think we agree on?), which I believe is the very thing we're discussing.
I personally view Russia, USA and China as serious threats to democracy. Because all three have toppled democratic countries for its benefit. And no I don't think they do it because they hate democracy. They do it because it helps their superiority. The victims just happened to be democratic sometimes.
> So in summary, there are very good reasons to be critical of China (CCP) independent of the current US administrations actions and historical baggage of the US.
And there are very good reasons to be critical of the USA independent of the current Chinese administrations actions and historical baggage of China.
My whole point is that administrations do things for economic and military superiority. Things like morality are just used by administrations to justify actions to their populace. I am sure you _personally_ dislike China for purely moral reasons. Most people are good who think in terms of morality. That is exactly why framing a rival as "evil" works so well. It's about power. If the world works on the basis of justice then the EU should have sanctioned the US for the Iraq debacle and now Palestine.
Can you maybe take a few minutes and write down all the good+bad things the US has done since say WW2 vs China? You'll understand why a neutral third party is wary of both.
> You'll understand why a neutral third party is wary of both.
Oh I can understand this, yet my conclusion stands that China (CCP) is and remains a threat to democracy woldwide (which is my original point).
You are not disputing this, correct? (if anything, you're drawing an equivalence to the US, which I disagree with, but doesn't refute the conclusion on the original point)?
I’ll just leave this here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_foreign_electoral_inte...
It’s a complex issue. It’s understandable people want democracy but it’s also understandable that it can be seen as a security risk. The brexit referendum in the UK is probably the best modern example of this.
