This depends on how you define ROI. Car infrastructure and lack of density reduces tax revenue for cities and strains infrastructure.
There are other human benefits to reducing car traffic and use in favor of public transportation:
* Reduces air pollution
* Noise pollution
* Allows a focus on human centric urban planning
* Allows for higher density commercial and residential increasing tax revenue
* Reduces pedestrian traffic injury
Thanks for this useful comment, too rare in this discussion unfortunately.
One thing to bear in mind is that roads are required no matter what, so the question is one of size, really. In general public transport shines and is definitely worthwhile in dense urban environments where cars-only infrastructure could not cope or would be completely disproportionate. As density drops usefulness and viability drop, too.
> In the end there is a balance between public transportation and car dependency and right now the scales are leaning too much in favor of cars.
Not sure that is the case in Europe. In Europe this tends to be driven by militant groups that want to ban cars for dogmatic reasons and they create real problems for people and businesses in the process.
A pragmatic approach is indeed to have a good balance and to accept that cars are both wanted and useful, and needed in many cases.
Unless you are actively managing your own herd or actively hunting I don’t see how you are connecting to nature at the grocery store.
People don’t care as long as it tastes good. The current methods we have for farming meat do not scale and we need to work on alternatives. Meat is tasty and people want to eat it.
Innovation will continue in the lab grown meat sector and when it eventually scales it will over take traditional methods. Current factory farming is anything but natural and there is plenty of harm being done.
I always love seeing more done in the web component space. I think Lit has the no build process captured pretty well and they include things such as a router.
I do prefer the style of of your components more, where you separate out the script and styles with html tags. I don't know if one way or the other is superior for performance, I but just like the separation verse the templated strings in Lit.
With build tools being so straightforward now-a-days, I struggle to see the value in the build less approach. One use case I can think of is maybe a constrained environment where the application contains some kind of customizable user components fully in the browser like a reporting WYSIWIG of some kind.
Is there a particular reason you prefer this approach?
With the caveat that I’m generally outside of the web dev sphere aside from casual tinkering: no build process means no setup and one fewer thing that can break. That’s valuable in itself.
> Is there a particular reason you prefer this approach?
Compared to Lit? Firstly, I like Lit. My approach is better for me because there are far fewer things to know in order to create a reusable object and there are far fewer things to know in order to use an existing object.
IOW, my approach trades off functionality in favour of a lower cognitive burden for me. I just wanted something that had the minimum functionality I need - create an object and then reuse it. For me, anything outside of that goal is peripheral burden that I'd rather not get bogged down in.
I agree with many here that this is not an approach for them, maybe even for most, but I am certain that if I find something useful that increases my velocity of feature delivery, then maybe someone else will as well.
I find that tools like Mermaid are pretty invaluable, especially when editing very large processes. Draw.io diagrams tend to get pretty unwieldy as they scale and editing inter process stuff if you forgot something quite frustrating.
Admittedly I primarily use D2 nowadays. The only features I miss in D2 from mermaid are the GitHub automatic rendering and Sequence diagram numbers. https://play.d2lang.com
I use excalidraw, even upgraded to pro out of my own pocket. It's not git-compatible in the sense that it's not text (though you can export to SVG and commit that, which I've done). But I love that it has the feel of an approximation or just a quick sketch rather than a formal promise of how a system works.
When I've used dot or mermaid to build diagrams I've always found it hard to specify layout, colours and sizes, which I use to emphasise different views on a system. I'd love some sort of middle ground where I get the benefits of version control but also the sketch-like character of excalidraw
I'm actually not sure, It's no really a flowchart editor, more of a vector drawing program, though it has some features like being able to pin the end of a line to an object so it follows while you drag
Nowadays I use mermaid, but I only use sequence diagrams. They're incredibly useful to convey to a client at a high-level what are the different workflows in a system.
From the post: All diagrams that look like the top image or the mermaid example after the complex one, could just be a list of steps.
For the complex one, maybe yes, it makes sense to have an overview and I think maintaining that vs text is also easier. However from what I've seen, most things can be boiled down to a list of 1, 2, 2.1, etc.
I have seen this thrown around a lot, but I do not think it is true anymore.
V lang had a rough launch from what I can tell, with the author overselling and mistakenly underestimating the amount of work needed to fulfill their vision.
V still has a ways to go, but it is in constant heavy development with lots of contributors. It also has a wide gambit of interesting hobby projects using it.
I know this is a few days at this point but Bolero has been in active development. All development work was done on the now deleted streamrendering and v0.24 branches. Version 0.24 was just published today: https://github.com/fsbolero/Bolero/releases
If it allows for alternative design patterns that are simpler then I think it's a win in the end. For example pattern matching is great when writer parsers as an alternative to going the visitor pattern route.
Pattern matching has finally made it out of ML land and getting increasingly implemented in mainstream languages. I'm not sure if Rust is the main driver here, but I'm glad to see it.
I also found Superset unintuitive to use and setup as well. I settled on standing up Metabase because it was so simple to get started with trying it since it can be launched as a single jar. The business users loved it and so did I and administration with a Postgres backend instead of the internal h2 database was a breeze.
Metabase is great. It truly is a BI tool. Superset is more of a visualization platform, which works great if you have engineers building reports. Less good if you expect more junior analysts to be super productive.
We ran into the same exact issue with Superset not being intuitive, just for a different audience that is more technical. Also went with Metabase which is good, easy to use, lacks some a few chart types but overall the past year has seen quite a few changes and bug fixes consistently happening.
My experience with Superset was the opposite. It's easy to install using containers. You can have it up and running and connected to ClickHouse in a few minutes. I also found the internal design pretty intuitive--the SQL query lab is much easier than Grafana's editor.
I like Grafana too, but there's basically no isolation between your query and the SQL database at least in the Altinity Grafana plugin for ClickHouse which is the main one I use.
I had the same experience. Featurewise Superset looked better, but after wasting a couple of hours trying to install it, I just gave up.
Instead I installed Metabase in 5 minutes tops: spin ec2 instance, whether and java -jar . I've never looked back.
The only thing that turns me off I'd that it's implemented in an obscure language. At one time I wanted to add some custom postprocessing to an api (given an sql query, get some python/pandas postproc command from a sql comment and execute it in the returned table), but the used language is just not for me (some lisp dialect)
There are other human benefits to reducing car traffic and use in favor of public transportation: * Reduces air pollution * Noise pollution * Allows a focus on human centric urban planning * Allows for higher density commercial and residential increasing tax revenue * Reduces pedestrian traffic injury
Well done video essays:
Parking minimums https://youtu.be/OUNXFHpUhu8?si=xAxUHCA0xmxCIZWg
Noise pollution https://youtu.be/CTV-wwszGw8?si=Eov6X3Z3I1T0l_bd
Infrastructure strain https://youtu.be/7Nw6qyyrTeI?si=KrVJ3tDaODHNGBwm
More on Infrastructure and Sprawl https://youtu.be/SfsCniN7Nsc?si=0ulEtryX4K6Ysy-N
Articles:
https://climate.mit.edu/explainers/public-transportation#:~:...
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/379358672_Vehicle_n...
https://www.britannica.com/topic/urban-sprawl/Costs-of-urban...
Climate town videos are all well researched and provide an enormous amount of follow-up content from their sources.
Generally, I care about all of the above and I perceive investments in public transportation to have a higher ROI.
Some extra historical context is helpful too: https://youtu.be/oOttvpjJvAo?si=ZGXF81qJnD_Fgw0L
The book The Color of Law by Rothstein is worth a read.
In the end there is a balance between public transportation and car dependency and right now the scales are leaning too much in favor of cars.