[–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Magnetrons are a lot less efficient than magnetic induction (which most modern electric kettles use). Magnetic induction is about 90% efficient at converting electricity to heat in the vessel, whereas the most efficient microwaves are about 60% efficient at converting electricity to microwaves.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Violence (or the threat of it) is the only means of influence that the people have ever had. As you've correctly identified, when other avenues of enacting their will are stymied, violence results, but that threat of violence must be what sits behind every vote, or the vote would have no power.

    To put it succinctly, "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun."

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    My ideological opponents are already silencing speech. I gain nothing by ceding that tool solely to them.

    As long as fascists exist they must be silenced. When they seize power, they will not do you the courtesy of allowing you to speak just because you let them. It's naive to think otherwise.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    If I'm remembering a book I read (either Human Transit by Walker or Street Fight by Sadik-Khan, I forget), with protected bike lanes the gender disparity between cyclists also starts to disappear.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    The investment costs for protecting a bike lane are almost nothing for any competent city, though. There's a reason it's possible for guerrilla urbanists to do it overnight with no money.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    Censorship of speech is a powerful tool. Why, if you have the true conviction of your beliefs, would you fight with one hand behind your back?

    Moreover, I've seen no evidence in my lifetime that letting my ideological opponents speak leads to positive results.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  •  

    The gist is that Portland drivers couldn't stop hitting crucial safety infrastructure (proving its necessity) so PBOT gave up on it.

    As one of the commenters pointed out: Since a pedestrian/bike fatality costs PBOT nothing and replacing a concrete planter a car has demolished costs them more than nothing, to balance the budget they're going to go with more pedestrian deaths.

     

    This is about the alleged food hall that was going to be coming to the Ritz Carlton Tower. They made a big show about how they'd be offering spots to the food carts they displaced.

    Well now e-mails are bouncing and there's radio silence from everyone involved about whether there even will be a food hall anymore.

    It sounds shocking, I know, but it certainly seems like the olive branch that they offered to assuage everyone's anger about the food carts they were displacing was a lie.

    Monkey-wrenching road pricing (cityobservatory.org)
    submitted 2 years ago by to c/portland@lemmy.ml
     

    Here's the fallout from Kotek's decision to stop all tolling, as well as a history of promises made and then broken about tolling.

    A couple of things I took from this article:

    • Oregon has reduced GHG emissions for most sectors except transportation
    • Tolling was part of the plan to reduce transportation emissions
    • Tolling on the I-5 Bridge will drastically reduce traffic on it, which obviates the need for more lanes
    • Only tolling on I-5 while leaving 205 free creates huge issues
    • The state was counting on tolling money for all of its projects, so car dependence is hurting car dependence, which is a small silver lining
    view more: next ›