Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | trollbridge's commentslogin

No modern hypervisors emulate a Voodoo 3D card. The upcoming 86Box release will probably have Riva 128 and ATI Rage 128 emulation as well.

Using an accurate emulation of such a device means you can use the drivers that existed back then that games back then were QA'd on.

Most modern hypervisors aren't built with Windows 98 in mind, either - it's not really what they're for, and a modern Mac can't run an x86 hypervisor anyway.


Clean, comfortable restrooms on buses are possible. There just has to be the will to do it.

No doubt they are possible. One factor that discourages their existence though is that the dregs of society mess them up or go in there to do drugs in private and then conk out. It's the number one pushback to providing restrooms for the public. It sucks, but it's how it is. Most likely the only way around this is to stop subsidizing transit and to be very careful to enforce fares. This is not popular among the people who love transit, who tend to also love the underdogs and root for them.

I'd be happy to pay bus fares that cover what a bus actually costs; needy people can apply for and receive assistance that is income-based (and get booted out of the programme if they engage in antisocial behaviour).

Where I am, buses are heavily subsidised; cost is about $3 per passenger mile. Fares are much cheaper (so cheap nobody ever really thinks about it, other than worrying if they have quarters for exact change).

They are often empty or have 1 or 2 riders.

They are slow, often show up to a stop late, so you have to plan everything an hour early.

They don’t have amenities like bathrooms and are uncomfortable for long trips, even though that’s the only sensible way to use them.

Due to political pressures, they have many, many stops and few express buses, so they are much slower than a car. The stops usually have nobody at them but the driver still has to slow down and check (sometimes they will just skip a stop they know is almost always empty).

The bus depots are not particularly safe or pleasant after dark and have trouble with attracting antisocial people.

Meanwhile, it would be cheaper to just pay for Ubers for anyone who wants them, and just make the Uber show up randomly late to replicate the experience.

There is a market emerging here often branded as “hood Uber”, “Alicia’s Uber” etc of people who will drive you for $1 a mile (cheaper than Uber) negotiated by text message and paid via CashApp etc. It’s completely unregulated. Some are now offering regular service in a minivan on a fixed route taking people to/from employers every day.


I've never been in any public transport that had a bathroom. I've only seen them on long distance buses, trains and planes.

BART wasn’t punishment based but before they installed turnstiles, many people simply refused to pay. It doesn’t make sense to run a transit system this way.

Transit is mostly funded by taxes and is meant to be for everyone. I don't understand your insistence that it must have a fare.

Why not fund public works through taxes and let everyone use it freely? Do you prefer toll roads and going through a toll over literally all the other roads that have no fare? Are roads worse because stupid and poor people can use them too?

Oh, and funny note, most toll roads in the US are in a weird system where you paid for it's construction with your taxes and then that infrastructure is basically gifted to a company.


Well, roads all have user fees here

Fareless options have been tried before and it comes out to that it makes problems with antisocial behaviour even worse. So I'd say we should just charge fares that cover actual costs, and then for people who can't afford that, provide subsidised fares.


How unprofitable should it be?

Now you’ve created a property tax regime where nobody is going to want to own residential property near a transit station.

Do you mean that nobody wants property values go up? The government gets more property taxes, because properties near transit stations are more valuable than in other places.

I certainly don't want my property taxes to go up, and since I'm not planning to sell or take out a big loan, my property value going up does me no good at all.

Yes, if you don't intend to sell, and actually want to live somewhere, higher property values just mean higher taxes (or if constrained like with Prop 13, declining services).

This doesn't have to be true. Washington State, for example defines the amount of property tax revenue to be charged and then divides that in proportion to everyone's taxable value.

So if everyone's value goes up 40% your property tax bill stays the same. If your area climbed faster than others, it goes up but not by 40%.


If property prices increase 40%, then cost of living increases, government needs to collect additional revenue to pay employees a living wage, and that feeds into taxes. Even without higher order effects, the above chain was literally about net increases in property taxes to fund more services and saying it's fine because property values increase (in specific locations, too). But property values are not a tangible thing for anyone who doesn't want to sell.

declining services here would mean that transit station stops gwtting service though, decreasing your property value

typically people want to live nearby transit stations because it means you can get places cheaply.

the property value goes up because of increased demand for it


I’d imagine it would get really congested unless massive fixed costs were expended to make the system higher capacity.

If you think subways have no marginal cost per passenger, you should consider Zeno’s paradox more

If you think there would be zero cost to shutting down the NYC subway and putting everyone riding it into cars...

Please show his error.

Doesn’t account for the cost of helicopter landing platforms at every station, for one. Or the cost of building additional helicopters to meet current BART scale, or the cost of the number of accidents you’d have once it scaled, or the cost of having all transit halt whenever there’s an air incident, or literally anything about reality. Like, are you people being serious or just smirking about your spherical helicopters?

His point was that Bart's current cost are HIGHER per passenger mile than the current cost of a helicopter, which is a notoriously expensive form of transportation (and also one of the most convenient).

Note that a 12 seat private jet also costs less per passenger mile than BART does. That's not beacuse jets are cheap, but because BART is currently absurdly expensive.


The error is completely ignoring the negative economic externalities of NOT having public transportation and the positive economic and environmental externalities of having public transportation.

Yes, but the minority who are malicious can render public spaces completely unusable.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: