The biggest motivator for cars and wide roads are weekend getaways; there are good options for commute and long-distance travel. Maybe, if you ban private car purchases and have good rail connectivity, people'd get by on rentals.

I am a ... fan ... of social ecology etc. But I feel such theories are difficult to apply in today's large-scale politics. Even the path to trying out any such theories in practice probably starts with trying smaller changes like liquid democracy (that is already proven in the corporate shareholder world).

These theories might go through massive changes if they meet reality. Remnants of past "experiments", say the basis of Liedloff's continuum concept, are not quite as neat as these untested theories.

I am a ... fan ... of social ecology etc. But I feel such theories are difficult to apply in today's large-scale politics. Even the path to trying out any such theories in practice probably starts with trying smaller changes like liquid democracy (that is already proven in the corporate shareholder world).

These theories might go through massive changes if they meet reality. Remnants of past "experiments", say the basis of Liedloff's continuum concept, are not quite as neat as these untested theories.

On a lighter note. There are Git experts? ;-)

To be fair, buses don't solve last-mile situations like this one, unless you expect the route to become walkable by reduction in car numbers. Even then, I wouldn't begrudge the busy housewife avoiding a long walk with a kid in tow.

Whoa! Cool it.

The mandate isn't from "government". Apparently, the government failed to do much about pollution, so a regulatory body was set up by the courts, which body did some good things (ban diesels) but also some hamhanded things like judge only based on technology age rather than the odometer. Throwing away a ton of steel and manufacturing that has had minimal utilization isn't going to help any.

You should've dissed the people who made scrapping the dedicated bus lane an election issue some years ago. I guess that never made it to the newspapers, and hence wasn't discussed online either.

There are intrepids everywhere! But I agree, this seems like too busy a place to be intrepid at.

there's already mountains of evidence of static typing making code significantly less buggy on average

What is this mountain of evidence? The only evidence I remember about bugginess of code across languages is that bug count correlates closely to lines of code no matter the language.

Mumbai has very frequent local trains, right? And buses?

I suspect writing cross-platform desktop/mobile apps in HTML/CSS/JS was another big pull in this direction.

Many popular languages are bad, yet JS is the one with a widely-deployed OS interface written in it (WebOS).

If free-software/open-source devs hadn't got caught up chasing all this, there was a chance of replacing JS with other languages in the stack. HTML/CSS/your_language probably for apps initially, even making browsers support plugging in languages later. The docs say anything other than JS is not supported, so no <script type="text/your_language">. If only!

There must be plenty of non-evil companies doing healthy business and giving out good dividends that you could invest in. It would be a bad idea only if you are in an arms race against other investors and they'd make more money investing in evil companies.

Risk seems unavoidable, and you would have to be deliberate in deciding what to invest in. Real estate in climate-change-facing regions too ended up being a risky investment.

I believe most people aren't bad actors. But also, most people can see what is good for them. And cooperatives prove that people can run with it to their advantage.

David Graeber made a very good point that the concept of money is only necessary for war. Take money out of the equation and the next local group will have to stretch to avoid mutual care.