decentrality

Very normal, lucid, and not extreme at all, only honest and having its philosophical money in its mouth. The page aesthetic said something totally different on first prejudgement, than the text ended up saying once actually heard. Feels encouraging to encounter this person. Very enheartening but so ordinary at the same time. Frank, common sense, not jaded, not touched by any inner resistance or even a twinge of confusion. Dude thinks this. Whew.

Thanks for the push, only other commenter ( at this moment ) who my Android app prevents me from responding to directly.

I am conscious of the placebo effect, and it having its own value; so even if it's "all in our head" that doesn't negate the actual impact of a thing.

This being said, today I was feeling a need to look up and use, or quickly create some new binaural beats for myself to work listening to, and found this.

So far ( after the first half-hour ) I've experienced a dramatic increase in energy, concentration, higher acuity, and all the traits I came to expect from binaural beats.

Would definitely subscribe after the trial so far.

If we judge based on engagement? Can we be sure who is more invested? Regardless of the unknowns there, can we ascertain intrinsic loyalty and/or belonging and/or commensurate reward to investment and will/self contribution? I'm obviously attributing a lot to their mode of being. But if it's even remotely close to true, you don't think we have a lot to learn?

We do an approximation of the same, macrocosmically, with little to no satisfaction. And they remain in balance with their ecosystem. And as far as we can tell their mind or conscience or consciousness is uncluttered by any of their acts.

I sincerely wish I were wrong.

Lions in the desert are smarter than we are then. We've "built" a far less quality world around us than even ants, bees, apes, birds. They at least have authentic bonds left. We have arrangements and schemes.

Also the arguments read more coherently in Mission Valley than Downtown, but again, not any more.

I also lived there, before Petco was built when Jack Murphy was Qualcomm. Basically a nightmare and not alive enough to justify the hassle because it's a consumer hub not an actual ecosystem.

But Pokez on 10 & E is a great example. The owner literally parks in metered or risky parking every day and caters to undriving locals. The lot next to him is usually reserved for USPS staff.

Tajima a few doors down, similar. Pet stores? Mattress place. These clearly cater to the thousands living above them. Quartyard, Basic, Tavern+Bowl, Kebab, grocery retailers. All local or Postmates / delivery geared. Atmosphere oriented, made for options beyond your own roof already setup for parties and nightlife very often. It's extremely competitive. Make Pizza is another great example. Totally geared toward the students of New School. Basically no parking. IDEA1 has entrances facing into the building and out, not phased by parking. A lot of pet focused business. Clearly local aimed.

East Village in general is secure in itself and when these new buildings on 11 & F, Park, 11 & G, etc all come in, the momentum is already tending this rooted and share economy direction. So basically, honestly who besides the disconnected types care?

People in East Village are by and large pretty happy with their situation and Downtown caters to our whim, our wishes, not just needs, but in a healthy relationship of not just myopic tourist diversion but real variety and home extension. The millenials are really attentive to feelings and aesthetics so let them be I say. And in thier wake comes a new pride in what we live in and don't need outside traffic to sustain. And the older generations level up accordingly as we realize the virtues of being so self centered that you create beautiful environments purely because you feel like it and not to create a draw... then you go ultra minimalist in every other area not related to at... and here we are.

*country not "world"

All this sounds accurate but hinges on a few presumptions. I'm leaving the comments I made though I've definitely taken unwarranted down votes for the same reasons I was first resistant to all this myself. I made all your arguments once upon a time. And in Little Italy your case is better, but in Gaslamp it's mostly moot because San Diego is literally the booziest city in the world by some metrics, so people use ridesharing out of different sets of necessity than environment or parking. The police blitz the DUI.

The main presumption is negatively affecting business. Not usually. We're not primarily tourist aimed in East Village. Little Italy is more so and Gaslamp almost exclusively. Yes, Petco Park traffic and Balboa Park traffic is frequent, but that's a vibrant aspect of the neighborhood unless you aren't really part of it and are a commuter. I catch myself taking my own car a few city blocks and trying to get home is intense, but I ought not have been so stupid living near a beautiful stadium as a perk and feature of our home.

Businesses are shifting to catering to the buildings around them, and if those do have parking, we get our guests day passes up to a certain amount per month as part of our parking rent. It's just about forethought again.

If I were a tourist or unintegrated person yes I'd be disgruntled too. But understanding your environment takes work and adaptation. If you live downtown and work elsewhere that's your choice. Live elsewhere and drink or eat out downtown without ridesharing, same. No friends with parking? Bummer. But shops here aren't dying for outside business anymore. We patronize local spots ourselves and Downtown is a short walk from end to end. It's small.

Factoring in all the social changes coming in we're not measured by the old standards and stuffy norms. We drink a lot. We walk around. We ride places. We work around the corner or remotely or cowork. We smoke weed more often easily. We generally get whatever we want delivered. We are here, now, on purpose not as diversion or at an aloof distance. The city is an extension of our home.

I feel like you're in a bracket of time locked expiration and perhaps bitter? People should know their surroundings as a rule and don't blame the place for being itself.

Last, parking doesn't automatically get used if it's there and that's the point of all this. Developers sort benefit but they need to go deep anyway if the building is tall enough. It's a shift away from living Downtown for the look and not actually living here. People actually live here more now, as present and rooted individuals who genuinely love it. I hope you locate that sense.

The thing is, the statistics have a long-tail, and the truth is that when the paradigm shifts, like it did and is doing, it's important to hear from first-hand accounts and not rely on statistics based on overall trends historically. They track an old dynamic, and the new dynamic is tending toward people living anywhere they want, especially into dense areas more comfortably, and the age-old bias toward moving outward at the point of having kids or retiring is reversing. I've seen it first hand, spoken to numerous people who are early adopters to this trend, and in all brackets of social standing and model of domestic life. It is evidence of an overall shift in how we live as people.

The benefits of being in the denser areas versus the believed drawbacks are changing, so much so it makes me genuinely hopeful about one day having 10 billion people versus 8 on the planet, which for someone who wanted less people not more, is notable at least and hinges on this shift. So I would recheck the numbers often and along new metrics, and favor first-hand information in times of change.

It's like how we all had this mental gap for a minute before people started having only a cellphone and no landline.

But now most of us haven't had a landline in a decade or more.

Though it's related to transportation, it's really similar to that. The modality is changing, not just the methodology.

As a programmer, we have this concept called "yagni" for "You Aren't Gonna Need It" which is based on this idea that you build only what you need: and I question the idea that living in one place and commuting to another is even going to be a thing as it has been historically.

The daily traffic through Downtown and Mission Valley, North 15, South 163, North 125, East 94, etc, then flipping directions later, is all the truly insane thing.

I don't think we "need" transit that anticipates bad choices of where to live relative to work, and Downtown is part of the World more than the Region. The world is changing this way. People used to live near rivers for water, and near animals for food, etc. Still applies if you can't work remotely.

Working remotely, living a more master-planned life, ride-sharing, etc... these are all options. But instead people prioritize this idea of me the individual in my individual car ought to be able to individually drive with all the other individual drivers wherever I want, and I disagree that is a design priority for a civil infrastructure.

So no, San Diego isn't making that more possible, and I applaud that. But when it comes to the original post and questions posed, it's still safe to say San Diego is tending toward car-free, especially Downtown, if you don't maintain backward compatibility with inappropriate circumstances like what you described. I've heard people say they commute to Point Loma from Descanso and we have a word for that: masochism.

Everyone commuting at all is a choice. The best case I can hear for not being car-free is the delivery business, contractors, etc... people who _actually need_ to be that kind of atypical. But to expect the civil infrastructure to give you the option to all rush certain areas at the same time every day, anywhere on the grid, is a bit old.

As far as getting to the beach, that's definitely an option depending on which beach obviously, but again, this isn't an amusement park so I'm not expecting the government to take me where I want to go, and I do have a car, largely for just driving at night all around the county, or for transporting animals, or making some of the trips you mention -- just never commute. And this is the type of thing San Diego has caused me to question. In the future if I wanted to just drive around, I might consider just using a ride-share rental vs. ride-share driver, etc. I never said public transportation itself was the answer, and to be car-free tending is within that definition: still planning to pay what you cost, not needing a huge system to accommodate me and do massive public works projects. I'd rather there be less of that honestly.

It starts in the center and emanates out. I've seen changes in the county center ripple out for decades, but the pace of that in the last 5 years has dramatically quickened.

Honestly it just takes a different outlook, and the more progressive ideas need to start somewhere. I'm so glad I got to see this first hand and am very impressed. Like I said elsewhere, I'm very grateful for this time Downtown. It has changed my outlook and expectations for wherever I live for the rest of my life.

I've invited my family with a large group of kids to come live here in light of that, and they evolved because of living here too!

In the true sense of the word "awesome" ... it really is. So I am excited to see the entire county evolve by what we do here in its core.

After living in Downtown San Diego numerous years now, I've begun actively considering not owning a car _except to transport animals outside the city_ and I feel like that has proactively made me a better person, by my environment.

I'd rethink the basic idea you need a car. I am. San Diego is rethinking that idea.

You are incorrect on 66-100% of your statement. I feel like you're just regurgitating a bias here.

And it's not even about cost of living if you really get down to it, it's about inability to adapt to the pace of having so many options, that you choose to have fewer, or preferring a slower pace and less options, which is fine.

But the homeless situation has been dramatically affected by positive changes, so no. There are plenty of families, many types of household, so no. And people generally move away from San Diego entirely, not just downtown, if they leave. It's an overall lifestyle change usually. San Diego as a whole is speeding up, and the cost comes with benefits of being here.

But like I said, if it isn't bias, it's preference, and preference is fine! The bias though, is flawed.

( Major edits since downvote since apparently I needed to spell out exactly why this is biased thinking, not just question the bias. This is really unfair to San Diego which is not perfect, but extremely progressive. We've dealt with the majority of the charges rapidly. Check your assumptions and refactor your thinking please )

Where are you coming from?

My sister and her husband have 4 children ages 1 to 9 and had no problem predominantly going car-free here.

I am not single.

http://thefreeride.com/fred/

It's insanely easy to find parking for $5-$10 or at least $20. This is pretty much just wrong, or the side effect of being part of a mob, which is different from visiting a city. It's tourism, whether you live in the county or not. Same idea as $11.50 for a beer at a concert. It's a convenience cost. In my other comment I agree that it's more difficult some places than others, but I went for 3 years so far, never paying $30. I've never paid more than $20, and only then when I was in a huge hurry. Since then I just changed my behavior, did better research, and it was fine.

People coming downtown treat the place like a theme park. It's not. Maybe reorient your expectations.

San Diego is tending toward car-free living anyway, so this is in line with that trend. Downtown we have scooters everywhere, as someone else mentioned. We have free public transit in various forms, for individuals and families alike.

Parking is generally not included in rent, that is a separate charge normally, so in essence it's already "no parking space" and you're just getting a better rate than outside, even when you park under/beside where you live. You're really _also_ getting security, not just parking. That's the real issue, if you have a car downtown, which I do.

All this being said, parking is generally very difficult here compared to other places with less concentrated downtown environments; more in Little Italy than in the Gaslamp Quarter, and more difficult in Gaslamp versus East Village. But again, cars are becoming less of a thing, and people are adapting.

What I hear in the comments so far is a misunderstanding of what a metropolitan area is. It's not designed to be the same as a suburban area. In the suburbs, you need "large vehicle" transportion, versus downtown where you need what's called "last mile" ... like scooters. Any other people need to do their research and see we even have FRED which is _free rides_ ... so you could park somewhere that isn't oppressively priced and get a free ride ( not even pay for an Uber/Lyft or scooter or bike, etc ) and be totally fine.

It's the problem of taking a suburban attitude into a downtown environment that's causing people to miss out on the actual purpose of the space and the infrastructure we already have.

As the previous maintainer of Reel ( High-performance Web Server based on Celluloid ) alongside the author of Falcon ( Samuel Williams ) I am proud to see this release get some attention, and heartily congratulate the author on work well done, both in the release itself, and in progress within the Ruby language.

Samuel is one of Ruby's best. He wrote RubyDNS as well, which was one of the best implementations of Celluloid, the asynchrony / concurrency / parallelism / distributed computing library written in Ruby, which has since come to EOL or hit a ceiling as trends shifted.

I am happy to see Samuel ( ioquatix ) continue his momentum personally, and contribute so much.

From a marketing standpoint, the game "feels" amateur in the way it's presented ( very insecure narrative, etc )

But when you watch the demo the game itself "seems cool" but in a way that realizes immediately this is Super Mario Bros reinvented.

Also this blog post was from February 2018 and has sat on the Dev Blog "above the fold" for most of this year. It seems like the game has a dark cloud over it.

If something isn't a labor of love, you should end it. But then there's that quote "you cannot excel at something you do not love" ... which seems like the real thing here. It seems excellent in its own ways, just not entirely original or well marketed. So ask why are you doing it and measure by some other metric than sales and usage.

Apparently we're late to migrate, but I recently started the move to RainLoop:

https://www.rainloop.net/ is actually much better software in my opinion, and is self-hosted unlike FastMail.

Rainloop satisfies the need for polished, smooth, elegant, yet simple "feeling" interfaces like Gmail finally became.

Handles multiple identities, multiple accounts, and contacts well; but no calendar.

Way better than Zimbra webmail, though that does have Calendars. On my local machine, I still use RainLoop rather than a traditional email client, it's that good.

ProtonMail, also mentioned, doesn't seem far off, but seems to lack the extra polish. It's in the neighborhood of RainLoop though, it would appear.

Would be 10x more awesome if an "auto-play" mode were possible, with associated audio-file, and pre-programmed transitions.

Would take sound file attachment, and array of minute/second offsets; once timed to audio file, this would be better than YouTube videos, and supplement conference talks.

Right on, it's fixed now.

At the time of me writing this, the link to nim at the top of the article is wrong. I let the author know, but it ought to be:

https://nim-lang.org/

The first reference to the FQDN ends with "-" before the TLD, apparently inadvertently.

Yes, there is one key presupposition there, that we actually are going to live forever in some way.

At the absolute minimum, that is an _excellent_ way to think about outcomes we'd actually benefit from.

If we have to be here forever, what do we do?

Favorite quote:

> I have been working on a startup on the side (and on the clock, because fuck it, idgaf anymore)

From the looks of it, you asked basically this same question within the past year.

I think the real question is: are you being honest with yourself?

The last time you asked this it was more along the lines of "I hate my job and want out, btw I have wife and 1 child" and now it's more cooled down to "I've accepted that I hate my job and I'm sort of just punishing them with my lack of direction in life" and then looking for someone to make the decision(s) for you, here, /again/ evidently.

So are you being honest with yourself? Apart from income, what do you actually WANT to be doing? When you "work full time for yourself" are you going to have the motivation to do that? What direction do you have already, and what do you want your direction to change into or continue to be?