Because of agglomeration and the incredible desirability of mixed-use walkable neighborhoods (see rents in walkable neighborhoods of NYC + SF + Boston for proof). This farmland is only desirable and sought out by developers because of zoning restrictions elsewhere.

>How does this position unroll? How does the farm eventually get developed in 50 years? Do they have to buy TDR from someone else? Does an "equivalent" TDR have to be demolished?

These are all great questions which reveal that TDRs are not a very forward-looking policy solution to the housing crisis. Maybe planners believe there will be more appetite for taller buildings in the future, or that land prices will rise enough that the owners' support for zoning reform will overcome opposition. It does seem absurd, and more like a way to bribe property owners so that local politicians can avoid making public decisions in meetings that 90% of NIMBY cranks disagree with.

If you can get a payout for "selling" something without having to actually sell any part of your property that you intend on using, and nothing will change in your neighborhood, why wouldn't you sell it? And if property owners and residents in a neighborhood are crying to anyone who will listen that the world will end if four-story buildings give way to six-story buildings, you now have a big incentive to show up to those same land use meetings and push back.

https://x.com/itsHemu2K/status/1887359825731899587

https://x.com/fREQUENCYCS/status/2003057996302049603

It’s the first model where I didn’t have to ask, repeatedly, that it use Powershell 5, and never use emojis or other invalid characters, like Gemini and those non-ASCII spaces.

“What about my water?”- not an issue in this area.

“What about my electric bill?”- we’re signing long term contracts with local power companies or building out our own capacity; we eat the marginal costs and don’t increase your bill.

“What about noise?”- we’re far enough away from the nearest person that they cannot hear us; fans are x decibels at y distance; not a problem.

“I saw on Facebook that data centers poison the water and spy on me”- seek help, you cannot block us from building out and giving you oodles of tax money for this nonsense reason.

Permitting reform made Austin, Texas the second-most affordable city in America by rent to income ratio.

>There are neighborhoods full of affordable new construction houses not far from where I live. They sell slowly because people would rather live in the popular areas.

Mortgage rates rose and property prices have not yet fallen to match reality. I would bet that this is a much stronger factor in preventing those new homes from selling rather than buyers simply having a preference for different neighborhoods.

We already have a fine for empty units. They're called property taxes, and they're the strongest and easiest-to-use tool that local governments have for reducing vacancies.

>I would argue a 1 bedroom apartment should have its rent capped at less than 40% of the monthly take home of someone on minimum wage.

Then you're making it de facto illegal to build new housing. No bank is going to lend money to anyone to build more housing if they can't charge enough rent to cover the loan.

>In what US city can someone on minimum wage raise two children? On the US federal minimum wage?!

Maybe not the US federal minimum wage, but Austin has become the second-most affordable city in America (median rent price to median household income ratio), just by permitting a huge number of apartments.

https://x.com/nickgerli1/status/2006872715316121750

You need more housing. Rents in Austin have collapsed because the city made it legal to build a lot more housing.

Housing is too expensive because it's illegal to build enough of it.

No, multi-generation households will not save us. We should not make it impossible for young people to move to cities where high-paying jobs are, or force anyone to stay in abusive homes because we have made it impossible to live on your own.

Technically you don't even need to have enough RAM to load the entire model, as some inference engines allow you to offload some layers to disk. Though even with top of the line SSDs, this won't be ideal unless you can accept very low single-digit token generation rates.

It frequently crashes after displaying ads, forcing me to re-open the app and watch ads again.

When watching ads does succeed (all 3 minutes of them…) and playback of my show begins, it shows the enormous pause button, the giant fade-to-black bars at the top and bottom of the screen, and covers up the subtitles, as though I had pressed ‘Play’.

And trying to pause requires you to press the pause button TWICE.

I tried to play a series, but instead of starting from the last-played episode + 1, it always plays the most recent episode since it’s a rewatch. This happened every time until I got caught up.

So I strongly disagree. If only to be able to watch all of this content without all of frustrating design flaws.

EDIT: They also end each episode with 2-3 minutes of ads. So you had to exit the show, then re-enter to not get hit with two ad breaks in a row.

They can absolutely be regulated, but you must prove actual harm instead of "I don't want any data centers near me because of (conspiracy theory I read on Facebook)."