The most prevalent mom & pop approach is either cash only or it's cash and PayPay. You may also see cash, PayPay and IC. PayPay, at first, had extremely low fees and an army of sales people that targeted mom & pops, pushing the low fees. They've since then increased fees as their saturation has increased, and now you'll see shops adding things like setapay or hachipay (which are annoyingly ku specific payment methods that are very low fee).

Larger businesses are owned by massive conglomerates, or are housed in shopping complexes owned by massive conglomerates that require them to accept more payment methods.

Like all businesses, they aim to reduce their costs and increase their margins. They aren't adding payment methods to reduce your inconvenience, unless they think doing so will increase their volume enough to offset the fees.

Folks need to remember that we're closer to being homeless than we are to being as rich as them. You don't need to defend billionaires.

My gas stovetop in japan has a temperature sensor, and can detect excess temperature (food or oil burning), maintain a temperature, etc. It's possible with gas.

That said, I miss my induction stovetop, and I'm building a house, and it'll have induction, rather than gas.

This primarily builds on top of cartography (https://docs.cartography.dev/), which I'm a contributor to, which pulls infrastructure, SaaS, etc info into a Neo4j database, makes edges, and has a standardize ontology, so you can do attack path analysis, vulnerability assessment, inventory, etc.

Seizu uses the RAG built by cartography, and adds reporting, graph exploration, automations and more on-top of it. It currently ships with a couple pre-made automations:

* Automatic dependency vulnerability fixes, like dependabot, but uses codex/claude/opencode in a sandbox to do so, which ensures it doesn't just bump a version in the file, but actually assesses whether the changes in dependencies need code updates, and gives you a thorough overview on if changes aren't needed, and why changes were needed if so. If tests break, it also watches and fixes them automatically. * A workflow to run the cartography sync, making it possible to split apart the stages, run portions of the sync on different schedules, in parallel, etc, while also making it possible to properly trigger downstream syncs, or other types of workflows. * Generic AI agent workflow, which can be staged, run in parallel, or chained together via inputs/outputs, using Seizu's own custom agent (which has good LLM provider support, sandbox support with files, etc)

Workflows are built on-top of temporal, allowing it to be quite flexible.

You can definitely see affects of the poor economy lately (lots of pawn shops popping up, replacing expensive cafes/restaurants), but housing is still reasonable for now.

It's also super common to negotiate a rate with an agent if you're buying a new house and selling your old one, by offering to let them be agent for both.

Source: was a licensed real estate agent for a long time.

I don't understand why folks always take this as an all or nothing thing. We don't need to redesign the suburbs. They're the ones causing the congestion, and they're also the ones benefiting from free roads. Taxing them to cover the their own externalities makes sense. If public transit is available and better than driving cars, the suburbs will either support them via redesign, or they'll pay the tax for the luxury of driving a car into a city they don't live in.

Sure, but the budget for transit is also extremely tight, especially compared to car infrastructure.

If only 10% of the costs are covered, that's even more motivation to not charge fees at all, right? Why impose that burden? More people riding public transit means less cars on the road, and less traffic, which is good for everyone.

> charges a fuel tax to pay for roads

For the most part fuel taxes haven't increased to cover the costs of roads (it hasn't increased with inflation at all, federally), and they typically cover highways. Recently, a number of places have been looking at pausing or removing fuel taxes to reduce costs of fuel, due to the Iran war. Most states cover the cost of roads primarily through their general funds.

In most of the US, people are forced to own cars because they don't have public transit available, or the available public transit is too infrequent, or there aren't dense enough routes. The reason behind this is funding.

Additionally, buses are less efficient because they need to sit in the same traffic as everyone else. Reduced traffic makes buses more efficient. Reducing car traffic is a win for basically everyone, and increasing public transit is additionally a win for basically everyone.

Car infrastructure is heavily subsidized, and congestion pricing is one way to make car owners pay for part of the cost. Why is it fair for public transit riders to have to pay per ride, when car owners get to use the infrastructure for free?

I'm nearly positive that was sarcasm.

> Deaths from all natural disasters have dramatically decreased over the last century.

Because of our ability to predict them, and due to advances in scientific knowledge that allows us to more safely handle them. It's not because they've become less deadly. They're also becoming more frequent, and deaths alone isn't their only problem. They also drive loss of shelter, migrations, economic damage, etc.

> you claim my comment is propaganda when I cite a scientific source

Yes, plenty of science is propaganda. The study you cited wasn't propaganda, but the way in which you used it was, because it's not applicable to the way you're using it.

Direct exposure to ambient heat is only one of the many issues related to climate change, and one of the least deadly. As I pointed out, the study didn't include wet bulb events, so even direct heat exposure wasn't properly covered in the study in terms of climate change.

I don't think this is climate change propaganda, but your application of this study by evoking it in a discussion about climate change feels like it.