https://github.com/rltvty2/ulli

Never used that program before because I have usbs.

You could also use wsl

Car size arms race doesn’t explain everything. Basically throughout the 80s and 90s every manufacturer deployed a crazy amount of technologies to get good crash ratings. Those technologies take up space. Engineering a crumple zone into an alloy unibody design takes up space. Sticking a million airbags all over everything takes up space.

Those technologies aren’t bad things. I’m glad my cars have had them. They contribute to the size of the cars.

The Toyota Camry didn’t go from a compact to a mid size because of the ford f-150. To claim so would be to gloss over how literally every compact car since the beginning of crash testing has been declared a death trap.

You rebutted some things stated with “should” statements and then talked about McMansions. I talked about how things are in response to the ops question and rooted everything in the experience of aging, poor rural populations. We’re talking about two different things.

There are more bigger cars on the road as a percentage of sales for any given year. I see a geo metro once a month but I see about a hundred suvs and trucks from the same era during that same time. It might not even be that a large car necessitates a larger, thicker frame and bodywork that can tolerate more rust before it just breaks in half. It might be that a larger car holds value longer and stays in the “worth doing maintenance on” category longer because of that.

I can go into more detail about the engineering reasons small cars don’t make it if you want. Idk if you want that.

If people were wealthy enough to buy good quality boots they’d save a lot of money.

I lived without a car for many years and did just what you describe. Renting pickup trucks to move things. Idk what you’re talking about. It sucks to rent a pickup truck and isn’t reliable or as cheap as you say.

More than anyone likes to admit is safety features. If you want a unibody alloy vehicle with 11 airbags you’re gonna need a bigger outside profile to accommodate the same interior volume.

But the interior volume has increased too.

And the aging population experiences increased suffering stooping to get into compacts or mid size sedans.

And the aging population is driving farther into their age.

And the infinitely rising housing market is pushing everyone to live out in the sticks where you need a car that rides higher to accommodate rutted out dirt roads.

And average road life of a car has been stretching longer and longer and the way you engineer for that is by overbuilding everything that isn’t gonna get regular service and replacement like the frame and rocker panels.

And the poorer you are the older your car tends to be so the more biased you will tend to be towards what’s still rolling 20 years after manufacturing (surprise, it’s big vehicles with big engines or Hondas and Toyotas).

And even if all that didn’t matter, people might abstractly care about gas prices or getting an electric but they can’t afford to buy a car that’s good on gas because of their limited funds on hand or creditworthiness so when it comes down to spending the same amount of money on a Prius or a Silverado anyone who thinks they might want to move a couch will pick the truck.

Since speaking directly to the proposed change didn’t do much, here’s an alternative to “banning ai slop”:

Ban the thing that’s happening. If there are too many “low effort” posts, ban low effort posting. If there are too many posts about non open source packages, ban posting about non open source software. If you really don’t want people self promoting with open source (a thing they’ve been doing for decades!) then ban self promotion.

The problem with all the things I just suggested is that they require serious consideration on the part of a moderator. “Is this post too low effort?”, “is this person promoting themselves in a way the community doesnt want?” and “is this post even about open source?” Are questions that require moderator effort. “Was the repo signed by Claude?” Takes no effort to answer.

Of course kicking kids out of the sandbox for not playing right kind of defeats the purpose of a sandbox and placing unnecessarily high barriers to entry on the commons defeats the purpose of a commons but what the hell do I know…