The cost of ST3 project in Seattle is now estimated at $180 billion. Or about $150k for each household.

Buses are not slow because of cars. Buses are slow because they are buses and have to stop on each bus stop. So they mathematically can't be much faster than they are, even on completely uncongested routes.

If you space the stops farther, this will STILL not help. People will just have to spend more time walking, so the average commute goes up.

Berlin (considered to have the best transit system for large cities): 11mph.
London: 9mph

Buses suck. Always. It's a mathematical guarantee.

So it's totally better to just wait until the cancer gets to stage 4 and then do an MRI to confirm it. Big brain. Much smart.

In reality, plenty of cancers are slow-growing and take years to spread. And of course, for more concerning cases, there needs to be a quicker follow-up. For example, another MRI in a month.

I meant that they found nothing alarming. The cysts are still there and unchanged.

Well, yes. And? Just do a follow-up scan in 1 year. I did a Prenuvo scan 2 years ago, and they did find suspicious cysts (I knew about them, actually). They flagged them and recommended a followup in 2 years. I also did that and it found nothing.

Basically, we just need need follow-up criteria for the MRI images. When they are used diagnostically, and not to just solemnly confirm a terminal cancer.

The cost of an MRI scan, even including the radiologist's time is less than $1k. Regular full-body MRI scans will drastically improve cancer survival rates. Yet doctors are weirdly reluctant about it: "something, something overdiagnosis, blah blah".

Yes, it IS an Apple issue. Windows does not require Developer ID validation on every app startup.

You have a problem right there. There is no faction in Venezuela that wants to help the general population. It's not a democratic country, and the entirety of its ruling elite is simply focused on holding on to power. They didn't even bother with messaging anymore.

Now the factions that formed its armed enforcer wing ("colectivos") will fight one another.

Not personally, although I did hire cabs quite a lot.

I often was staying with my friend in Chiswick, and it often took me almost 90 minutes to get to the British Museum. By car it was barely more than 30 minutes.

It actually doesn't matter as much as you think it does. Go on, play with the isoline API or with Google Transit. Transfers kill the average speed, even if they are streamlined.

Indeed. Transit can ONLY be optimized to transfer people between The Downtown and the outlying living areas. It mathematically can't do anything else efficiently. This creates malignant runaway centralization by providing incentives for companies to build offices in The Downtowns. In turn, driving up prices within the distance of comfortable commute.

Random lon/lat selection from the bounding box (ignoring the curvature of the Earth, not important at this scale), then filter them using the bounds of the city area (Greater London or London Postal District). Then plot the routes using Google Transit API. There's also a great visual tool: https://www.geoapify.com/isoli... - select a point in Downton London and check the isochrones for transit and cars.

The key to look here is the _areas_ of the zones. Cars can reach more points compared to transit within the given time, even with all the congestion. This is indeed a highly counter-intuitive result, but it's actually in textbooks for urban planning.

Why everybody doesn't use cars then? Because of the cost of parking in cities.

Now? Sure.

Here's the map of Brexit votes: https://www.bbc.com/news/polit... Do you see anything unusual? How majority of people outside of the London area voted to leave?

I'm not conflating anything. Transit enables higher and higher density. Higher density causes more misery for _everyone_ (and not just for minor towns outside of large urban areas). The causation chain is there.

I used to go to London every weekend for almost half a year when I was living in Amsterdam.

Correct. With the caveat "on average". And this is true of London, btw. Try dropping 100 points in London randomly and plot routes between them, during the rush hour for buses and cars. Then compare the average times. I just did that (I'll upload scripts to Github) and cars are faster by 2.5 times during the rush hour.

On the contrary. Without the transit system, London would have been much better, as fewer people would have moved there. With more jobs in smaller cities, resulting in less inequality between rural areas and London.

Yes, and it works so well that most of these 3 billion passengers can't ever have enough money to buy a house anywhere close to their commute destination. With the average commute time now creeping up to 1.5 hours.

While smaller cities just 3-4 hours away are dying. Great success. BTW, how's that Brexit thing going?

Can you provide me examples of well-designed large European cities that have oh-so-great transit? Here are the facts: the average commute time for small American cities is almost TWO TIMES faster than the fastest commute time in large European cities. Even the average US commute is faster than the fastest European commute in large cities. Cars also provide greater variety of possible employers and accessible businesses.

Yes, I have citations and data. But you live in a world of "alternative facts" that just _feel_ right. And you just dismiss anything that disagrees with them outright, just like our dear MAGA friends.

It would be hilarious if it weren't so sad. Western democracies, strangled by bike lanes.

Apart from climate change, the rest of the issues are just symptoms of the decreasing quality of life. And it's the universal reason in the Western world, from the US to Germany. And it provides fertile ground for all kinds of populists who offer easy solutions. Like Trump, or AfD in Germany, or Le Pen in France. Or now Mamdani in NYC who campaigned on rent freezes and state-run groceries.