You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly. You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Not Just Bikes / r/fuckcars / Urbanists / New Urbanism / Car-Free / Anti-Car - People and grifters who hate personal transport, freedom, cars, roads, suburbs, and are obsessed with city planning and urban design
Having something of your own is always going to be preferable to a common space unless it's literally outside your budget (like, say, tennis courts).
For example, fitness equipment. Anyone can afford to buy and store some dumbbells that aren't rusty and a rubber mat. Reality is most gyms that aren't top-dollar "lifestyle resorts" tend to be pretty run-down (more often than not), or will try to humiliate you if you push yourself (Planet Fitness, as an example).
Fuckcars is essentially, “what if The Tragedy of the Commons, but for everything?”
People take care of things they worked hard for. If you want people to be good stewards of their spaces/transportation/environment, then let them have a stake in it.
Having something of your own is always going to be preferable to a common space unless it's literally outside your budget (like, say, tennis courts).
For example, fitness equipment. Anyone can afford to buy and store some dumbbells that aren't rusty and a rubber mat. Reality is most gyms that aren't top-dollar "lifestyle resorts" tend to be pretty run-down (more often than not), or will try to humiliate you if you push yourself (Planet Fitness, as an example).
Another example is tools. Do you want the American God tier slag hammer that will last forever, the Chinese one that might need fixing, or the dogshit Indian one that will blunt within a month? Same with welding helmets and welding machines: Lincoln Electric: built in the USA, dumb as a box of rocks bur solid as one, or Miller: much easier to use, but built in China and less durable? Being able to choose your own equipment and mix and match is wonderful, and best of all you get to make sure it's maintenence is done on time.
Jason replies and says that he won't make that video because Americans and Canadians feel they deserve way more space than they need: View attachment 4117563
Spoken like someone who never has never tried to actually make anything. 99.9% of makerspaces have only very basic tools and no one with any actual skill frequents them (presumably because they have their own shop or access to their workplace's shop). They're for yuppies to pretend that they have practical skills. Good luck finding an actually expensive tool like a waterjet at one; even if they had the budget for fancy tools, they wouldn't buy them because the liability is too high to let randoms use them.
>we need to fund public transport
>we should avoid using cars needlessly
Fair enough. >we should convert existing road into bike lanes
>we should raise taxes on vehicles and fuel
How about no? >people ought to live in cities
>eating meat is morally objectionable
>houses should be shrunk
>workspaces must be collectivized
>hobby spaces must be collectivized
Suburban Americans are such massive over-consumers. I, unlike those dumb carbrains, live a lifestyle where I literally can't do anything without consuming:
The guy with a fridge, a yard, and a home machine shop is far less of a consoomer than the guy who does nothing but frequent expensive restaurants.
They also still believe for some reason that suburbs don't have parks in walking distance, even though the vast majority of them do.
People with large pantries and fridges A). are usually families so they need more food and B). they are buying on a bi weekly or even monthly basis so its not like they are gorging themselves on 8 course feasts every night. These redditors just have no idea how the other side (rural, small town, and suburbs people) live.
Calling these people communists is a compliment, that would imply they at least pretend to care about the working class. They don't, they openly despise the working class and want them enslaved.
Oh the Welder in me is storming at that workshop comment. At least working in a shop with guys I know, they won't be beating the equipment apart. Even then, it's not my shit . Things wear out quicker, and you're still expected to bring your own basic tools. Making my own shop at home means I can pick out the equipment I want, to when I do maintenance, how big the shop is, to even things like backup generators to keep things running if power goes out. This kid knows nothing of work.
They know nothing of having real life friends either. I have friends and family local and we conspire to purchase tools such that we do NOT overlap on the speciality shit like drain snakes and planers. This works exceptionally well if you get to know your neighbors, too, soon you each have your own workspace but you have access to a very wide range of tools when needed.
Bursts of spirited cheers ring out from crowded bars during World Cup soccer matches. Whiffs of marijuana waft from coffee shops. Hordes of tourists shuffle along the narrow streets, making it difficult -- if not impossible -- for a car or even a bike to pass through.
A few men stop to ask lingerie-clad sex workers posing behind brothel windows about their services. But the vast majority simply stare or gawk as they stroll.
At one establishment along the Oudezijds Voorburgwal canal, a middle-aged man wearing jeans and a baseball cap snaps a photo of his friend against the window, despite signs forbidding photography. They trade places for another photo, then walk off, laughing.
It's just another day in one of the world's most infamous tourist hubs. But if city officials have their way, the De Wallen neighborhood, as it's known locally, will eventually draw visitors who come to appreciate its unique heritage, architecture and culture instead of its vices.
Those infamous lights are, for now, still shining. But, in perhaps the most controversial aspect of the city's tourism reboot, they may dim in the coming year depending on the status of a proposed "erotic center" that would move the window brothels into a single building located on the outskirts of town.
After visiting amsterdam this summer, most of the city was honestly pretty disgusting. The architecture is beautiful as is taking a river cruise or viewing other cities around NL, however a lot of the central city just smelled like stale beer, was packed with sketchy guys trying to sell me coccaine and other illegal drugs. Prostitutes walking around was far from a "cultural element" it was just an area filled with weird euros looking for favors.
Food was generally really disappointing, however grocery stores / delivery apps were incredibly useful. The most annoying thing to me was how certain neighborhoods flat out do not accept Visa / Mastercard. Basically every other developed nation accepts Visa, I was annoyed and decided to not go back to areas where they literally couldn't take my money. That said, PUBLIC TRANSIT IN NL IS ABSOLUTELY INCREDIBLE! But I don't for a second believe many ppl don't get TBI's from bike crashes without helmets.
Suburban Americans are such massive over-consumers. I, unlike those dumb carbrains, live a lifestyle where I literally can't do anything without consuming: View attachment 4117572
The guy with a fridge, a yard, and a home machine shop is far less of a consoomer than the guy who does nothing but frequent expensive restaurants.
They also still believe for some reason that suburbs don't have parks in walking distance, even though the vast majority of them do.
Honestly, I think that at the root of their point of view is that they are lazy. Notice how he bitches about "maintaining" a big back yard. Completely ignoring that a lot of people find mowing grass/gardening very relaxing not to mention is great for pets and parties as well. They don't have families so they never had to budget for 4 mouths or bother to learn how to cook so they never experienced the joy of cooking and having what you want, how you like it, at any time. Same with a well stocked garage. They buy ikea shit, toss it when it breaks, and always have somebody else to fix their problems. Meanwhile when I still lived at home I would find used furniture on the side of the road, toss it into the back of my beater CRV and take it back to the garage to get it cleaned and fix so I can use it. Also when said CRV breaks down, having the tools on hand means a $300 repare job that lasts two hours at a shop turns into a $30 part, a quick youtube tutorial and 20 mins of fiddling. These are truly the people that own nothing and are happy.
They know nothing of having real life friends either. I have friends and family local and we conspire to purchase tools such that we do NOT overlap on the speciality shit like drain snakes and planers. This works exceptionally well if you get to know your neighbors, too, soon you each have your own workspace but you have access to a very wide range of tools when needed.
First off I get the friend thing totally. It not only helps spread the financial burden, but it gets you outside, let's you know your neighbors. People that live in these cities are lucky if they own a hammer, much less have someone to rely on when things get rough.
As for the other bit of news... hilarious. How are they going to cope on reddit about their hookers being moved to the seediest part of town that you need a car to get to? Probably to tell you to take a bike.
Depends. In Germany they're on the near end of the intersection while inside city boundaries, and on the far end if outside (although this might be this strictly only for regular signs).
Also, Germany does sometimes have right-on-red possibilities. Sometimes a green right-arrow is attached to the traffic light that means you can turn right on red there. It's a thing carried over from East Germany after reunification, and is rarely seen to the point where many German drivers don't actually understand what it means because they only heard it once in driving school.
I don't get the argument against right-on-red. Consider the situation: An intersection and you have a red light. That means traffic in your straight direction has to stop. The argument is that turning right then would endanger pedestrians and cyclists. But how? Pedestrians, cyclists and other traffic crossing you are the most obvious thing to look out for, and if they are there, you can't turn right, anyway. Pedestrians and cyclists crossing in your original direction so you'd hit them while turning right also have red and shouldn't be crossing, and are in more danger of the regular traffic that doesn't have red. A cyclist coming up to an intersection that's red for them following up on a car that's signalling a right turn has zero business trying to pass that car on the right, or really crossing the intersection at all because it's red.
As usual they can vastly improve their own safety by FOLLOWING THE FUCKING LAWS.
/edit:
Also, I dislike traffic lights being on the near side quite often. I'm somewhat tall, so I sit somewhat far back in my car. Quite often I have to lean forward quite awkwardly to see the traffic lights when I'm stopped at the front.
Also, Germany does sometimes have right-on-red possibilities. Sometimes a green right-arrow is attached to the traffic light that means you can turn right on red there. It's a thing carried over from East Germany after reunification, and is rarely seen to the point where many German drivers don't actually understand what it means because they only heard it once in driving school.
Sounds like it's more common in post-commie countries. If such indication is shown, then you can turn but you have to yield both to the main traffic which has green AND the pedestrians. It helps in cases there's three (or more) step intersection so you can cross the intersection faster than waiting for the green signal for the protected turn.
Issue regarding visibility seems to be addressed already; newly built poles double traffic lights that are on lower position of the pole and up high, so you can see them from far away and when you stop right by the pedestrian crossing so it's best of both worlds I guess.
On topic of hating cars and traffic - it's ironic that pedestrians/cyclists cry about controlling the cars as much as possible, yet they refuse to cross safely at designated places and decide to YOLO pass through the street, often on corners. I guess asking for people to stop and look both ways for the traffic became too difficult of a task to process.
Depends. In Germany they're on the near end of the intersection while inside city boundaries, and on the far end if outside (although this might be this strictly only for regular signs).
Also, Germany does sometimes have right-on-red possibilities. Sometimes a green right-arrow is attached to the traffic light that means you can turn right on red there. It's a thing carried over from East Germany after reunification, and is rarely seen to the point where many German drivers don't actually understand what it means because they only heard it once in driving school.
I don't get the argument against right-on-red. Consider the situation: An intersection and you have a red light. That means traffic in your straight direction has to stop. The argument is that turning right then would endanger pedestrians and cyclists. But how? Pedestrians, cyclists and other traffic crossing you are the most obvious thing to look out for, and if they are there, you can't turn right, anyway. Pedestrians and cyclists crossing in your original direction so you'd hit them while turning right also have red and shouldn't be crossing, and are in more danger of the regular traffic that doesn't have red. A cyclist coming up to an intersection that's red for them following up on a car that's signalling a right turn has zero business trying to pass that car on the right, or really crossing the intersection at all because it's red.
As usual they can vastly improve their own safety by FOLLOWING THE FUCKING LAWS.
/edit:
Also, I dislike traffic lights being on the near side quite often. I'm somewhat tall, so I sit somewhat far back in my car. Quite often I have to lean forward quite awkwardly to see the traffic lights when I'm stopped at the front.
Correct. Right on red still requires you to stop no matter what, because you don't have the right of way. You also are taught to yield for pedestrians and cyclists if they're there, but if it's timed right, they go ahead first before the light.
I got a feeling that most people who hate right on red don't like following rules as a pedestrian anyway, despite being "muh pedestrian deaths" being a key talking point.
But when it really comes down to it, this is exactly why they hated that BMW ad so much because despite the commercial showing off that it can reduce pedestrian collisions, the "pedestrian" in question may have been a bit TOO identifiable.
Well, the Blue cities used to. Now they have homeless encampments. Well, parks, sidewalks, sides of the road, pretty much any place without protective boulders.
A pet peeve I have regarding this movement is a lot of European cities are the way they are because their streets were put down when everyone walked or used carriages.
Well, the Blue cities used to. Now they have homeless encampments. Well, parks, sidewalks, sides of the road, pretty much any place without protective boulders.
That’s the other bone I have to pick with them is how dangerous cities have become because of their shitty politics. What point is there to having a bike if it’s just going to get stolen by some hobo? Why would you want more walking infrastructure if it increases your chances of getting shanked?
Yes, I do, because THAT'S ME! That "Flimsy" reason I'm using is ALTERNATIVES DON'T EXIST.
If you want to live your life not defined by the car? I'm not going to stop you and demand you start driving, but, it's unreasonable to expect me to join you or to say the fact I wont is proof of some great moral fallacy on my part. You wanna paint your house pink? Have at it, but don't demand I start repainting mine to match because you don't want to see a grey house out your window and tag my refusal to use my money and time to accommodate your lifestyle choice as a "flimsy excuse".
They remind me of Calvin’s dad in Calvin & Hobbes. I always thought his bike rants were funny but I never expected anyone to form a serious political movement around them.
They remind me of Calvin’s dad in Calvin & Hobbes. I always thought his bike rants were funny but I never expected anyone to form a serious political movement around them.
I believe Calvin's dad drove a car to work (or at the very least they had a car) out in a wooded semi-rural area in a non-descript part of the Northeast (possibly Ohio) with a large house and lots of backwoods to explore. Though there was an early strip about a reference to missing a bus.
But the bike rants, while probably a real frustration from Watterson, were funny because there was always a level of self-awareness about them. You know a car is much better in most cases, you know you look like a dork riding one. With /r/fuckcars and their apostles, there is no self-awareness and reality must bend to their desires. This is why there's manipulated "studies" and a lot of cope in those posts.
They're mostly "a"political in that thread but only because Laura called them out. They downvoted the few conservatives who dared to agree with them and the thread is full of people preaching that there is no such thing as the left because they're so far left that they think everything is "far-right".
Equal rights: People have equal rights under the current Bill of Rights. Abolish Slavery: Done via the 13th Amendment and I will not address neo-slavery or whatever until a concrete action plan is done about Middle Eastern slavery as its much worse that prisoners being forced to clean their own cells.
Will these activists demand that children be paid $15/hr to clean their own rooms?
Give everyone food and homes: What type of food? Does it have to take into account their dietary choices, such a gluten-free, keto, or low carb? How about if its Halal, Kosher, or other religious based beliefs? Does the food have to provide complete nutrition or can it be just bread / rice? Is meat included or is it not? How about persons with different cultural backgrounds? Do they get specific foods unique to their own culture or does it have to be a common staple?
What will be the compensation to farmers to plant X? What are you going to do it the farmers refuse to plant your crops so that they may plant non regulated foods that have a higher profit. Since you are subsidizing food, this will cut into the supply of the market resulting in other food items going up in value, do you feel comfortable dictating in a de facto manner what lower income people eat?
When it comes to homes, what are we talking about? If there is a geographically favorable location (a beach, a river, near the mountains with skiing, world renowned culture sites) who gets to live there? Do government officials get preferences just because an agency is based in a metropolitan / culturally sophisticated city? Isn't that an unfair advantage to government employees over jobs like manufacturing? If a person is homeless do they have less preferential housing? How much square footage does a person get? How is these homes funded? What type of amenities will these people have? By providing housing you will limit supply as it will take a portion of builders out of the market thereby making other properties much more expensive. Do people get to live and own non-government controlled housing? Is it fair to to people that may be able to afford their own housing now but will not once government housing is available?
Suburban Americans are such massive over-consumers. I, unlike those dumb carbrains, live a lifestyle where I literally can't do anything without consuming: View attachment 4117572
The guy with a fridge, a yard, and a home machine shop is far less of a consoomer than the guy who does nothing but frequent expensive restaurants.
They also still believe for some reason that suburbs don't have parks in walking distance, even though the vast majority of them do.
Why worry about having a big pantry?
From the left leaning The Gothamist:
Bodega berries notwithstanding, many New Yorkers rely on smaller markets with few fresh produce options to feed their families, simply because they’re more plentiful than full-service grocery stores. According to state data from 2016 aggregated by the city health department, bodegas outnumber supermarkets 18 to 1 in the poorest parts of the city — more than double the gap seen in wealthy areas.
We conclude that smaller food stores have higher prices for most staple foods compared to their closest supermarket, regardless of proximity. More research is needed to examine staple food prices in different retail spaces.
So now, I am not only paying higher prices but have less selection of the groceries I want and am able to cook. They might same Amazon or other meal delivery services but those are prone to theft. Specialty items might be ordered by the bodega but if I wanted a butter with a higher butterfat percentage from grass fed cows and is "European" style vs regular I am paying a much much higher cost on an already inflated grocery bill.
Why worry about having and maintaining a big yard or a dedicated indoor play area when kids can walk to the park?
What if the parks have to close due to a new variant of COVID, a bad flu, or some other disease?
Do your kids want to throw a ball around? Arrested!
Your kids better not touch anything that might be suspicious, like Fentanyl.
Do you feel kids are safe around a large homeless population?
One of Jason's fans asks for a video about what people's homes look like in different parts of the world: View attachment 4117557
Jason replies and says that he won't make that video because Americans and Canadians feel they deserve way more space than they need: View attachment 4117563
Ah...I see that they will be using science to determine what they think I need... What Stewart Hicks thinks my needs are. Two examples of the largest dwelling I could reasonably need according social science.
Fuck them. Apparently, they believe that I only need an apartment between 100-400 square feet. Who the fuck are they to determine what my needs are? Looking at the apartment themselves, I see that none of them have a washer and dryer hookup, both lack a patio, their is only one restroom, and my bedroom a sort of small. Now, I am sure that a washer / dryer hookup are available on some 400 square feet properties but I haven't found any yet. Doing a cursory search the only units the only ones I have found are 605 sqft or more. Thus the basics of what I need from a washer and dryer hookup alone makes me aberrant in their society.
My bare minimum standards of what I would accept.
Regarding having only a single restroom, I prefer units with two restrooms. One for any guests that I have and the other restroom for myself. But, I guess I am a fucking weirdo for wanting that too. On the size of the bedroom, I think its kind of small and perhaps I would want a work / shitposting station instead of having it in the main living area. Perhaps, I am a bibliophile and want a couple nice areas to read my books. Well, it seems that I will only have one area where I could do so. But let me guess, I am a fucking weirdo for wanting a separate area to read as opposed to watching TV in my personal living space. I should just go to a third space if I wanted to do that. Fuck, owning books! That's what a library is for until the books I read are removed for being politically incorrect.
What it does mean is that And To Think I Saw it On Mulberry Street, If I Ran The Zoo, McElligot’s Pool, On Beyond Zebra!, Scrambled Eggs Super!, and The Cat’s Quizzer are ready to be decommissioned. Libraries which still have those titles among their holdings likely weren’t seeing much circulation of them prior to March 2, and with clear and direct admission of what’s inside those books from the organization responsible for publishing them, there’s no excuse to keep them around.
It’s not censorship. It’s responsible collection curation.
It’s not censorship. It’s being accountable to your community, which is comprised of people from a myriad of backgrounds.
A book that might be removed due to it not being politically correct in stating that those in Caribbean nations treated African slaves far worse than in the American South.
Additionally, Stewart Hicks is incorrect in a portion of the video. The studies author is quoted as saying that Dissatisfaction is the result of comparison, NOT ONLY OBJECTIVE QUALITIES IN THE SIZE OF LIVING SPACES THEMSELVES. In essence, if the quoted image size does play a role but the concept of "Keeping up with the Jones" also has a factor.
The reason I emphasized this point is because Stewart Hicks stated that it is ONLY COMPARISON of size matters.
dissatisfaction with the size of one space has to do with its proximity to people that live in larger spaces this is according to research by Clement Bellet argues that dissatisfaction then is the result of comparison not objective qualities in the size
This is a significant difference as home improvements to the kitchen, bathroom, or backyard could be a comparison factor that makes current owners value their homes less. If Stewart Hicks is correct and size if the only factor with comparison making people jealous then what would they propose? A size limitation? The social engineering of society into accepting a standardized size for the number of people in a dwelling? I hope that Stewart is incorrect as the alternative sounds something like Central Planning and aspect of Communism.
P.S. Steward Hicks does not provide sources so the possible study is this but the quoted image is not a direct citation. I will note that Bellet classifies the housing focused in his studies at around 3000 square feet so it might be limited to larger homes if we accept the study at all.
Including a youtuber who Jason frequently promotes going by the name of Yet Another Urbanist:
While I had to watch the video twice to understand its point (then again I do that a lot with urbanist videos because they're brain rot), it's not that hard to understand. It's about how influencers (such as Casey Neistat) glamorize life in the big city and how along with criticisms of suburbia from the likes of Not Just Bikes and centuries-old anti-car arguments, people might be enticed to move there, only to find it's not what it's chalked up to be and they'll end up resigning themselves to thinking maybe suburbia isn't that bad then will move back there.
Note that the conclusion is treated as a bad thing by Internet Impact, it's why the title says "May Lead to Bad Urban Planning". Because people who go through this will end up thinking suburbia is better and the author is actually on the side of the urbanists here.
Of course in classic NJB fashion, Jason clearly didn't watch the video and makes some unrelated point about Americans being so sheltered they don't know Europe and Amsterdam exist (even though the video cites NJB and plays his B-Roll of riding around Amsterdam).
(Hilarious how he says NYC/SF are overrun with cars, and says their transportation systems are chronically underfunded when NYC's is the most overfunded system in existence with massive cost overruns compared to other transit systems around the world.)
I'd make some point about how Jason can't seem to understand why people might not want to live in big cities and dense areas (Internet Impact's whole point) or why his "education" doesn't work, but that's giving him too much credit and assuming he watched the video.
Btw you'll like this @quaawaa, Jason says he isn't cherry-picking anything when he does his livestreams riding around Amsterdam:
Besides no mention of the Randstad, I'd love to figure out what else is wrong with his statement.
Since Jason is going to only be on Mastodon for the foreseeable future, let's look at some of his toots.
Trouble may be brewing on the horizon for Jason's single user instance:
He used to run his own email server and kept ending up on spam blacklists
The fediverse will probably end up outlawing single user instances because of spam, at that point he'll have to grovel to instance operators to specifically unblock him.
It gets even funnier when you realize this comes not even 12 hours after Jason is smug about how twitter isn't blocking links to his instance:
I googled it and got results from places like streetsblog.org, biker advocacy sites and Strong Towns, so it's likely a new BS term urbanists made up.
Apparently Jason lived car-free in Toronto and used a carshare (which doesn't sound carfree?) and continues to use a carshare in Amsterdam (for reasons not given):
I remember he made a video about using carshare (something like "You Don't Have To Own A Car If You Don't Have To Drive To Work") but I didn't watch it.
I got a feeling that most people who hate right on red don't like following rules as a pedestrian anyway, despite being "muh pedestrian deaths" being a key talking point.
Definitely. The cyclist and pedestrian bubble really hates that there are rules they also have to follow.
As I said a few days ago, they think cyclists don't follow rules because there isn't enough cycling infrastructure and thus not enough cyclists out there to create peer-pressured good behaviour. Basically admitting that they ride like assholes until they're beaten up for it, and demonstrating that even in Germany they have oddly romantized views on what cycling in Amsterdam is like. They think the Dutch all ride super nice and politely on their perfectly well-built cycling lanes, but anyone who's ever actually been there knows they ride like assholes there, too.
Here's the thing: I've always used the bike as much as possible, I like it. Haven't had a car until I was like 30, and I probably wouldn't have gotten one if it hadn't been for my ex. I'm totally down with heavily favouring bicycles over every other method of transport in cities as much as possible, but I realize that sometimes you need a car, and some need it more often than others. In all those years I've rarely felt unsafe riding a bike in a city, no matter the cycling lane situation. Wanna know why? Because I follow the rules. It's not that hard. I don't expect nor demand that all cars see me at all times, and that they always yield to me no matter the situation. I know they sometimes don't see me, and yes, I know some drivers are bad at driving, forgetting to use turn signals, not stopping, or just being general assholes. So I ride accordingly, and I feel safe.
But the cycling bubble can't accept that. They don't want to have any responsibility when partaking in traffic, they want their own special walled off lanes because they have seen pictures of those small cycling roads in the Netherlands and popped a boner over them. They don't want rules to apply to them, and they will actively endanger themselves in their madness over not having to follow rules.
Makes me ashamed to actually like riding bicycles sometimes.
I remember he made a video about using carshare (something like "You Don't Have To Own A Car If You Don't Have To Drive To Work") but I didn't watch it.
I have, it was actually the video that made me realize what I hate about the urban design channels. I started watching them open minded. I was genuinely interested in urban planning, especially how to make good public transportation. I was and still kinda am pro public transportation but I found myself unreasonably angry and disliking it intensely after watching these videos and I didn't know why. My values hadn't changed, I still like bikes and having public transportation options but now now even thinking about improving them made me see red. A moment in this video made it click.
The video he basically showed how ride sharing works and why he thinks it's better than owning a car. My reaction initially was that he was being self centric, not thinking functionality outside of metropolitan areas and ignoring tons of variants that people have in their lifes. To me he was offering an option that needed very specific circumstances to work but I assumed he was trying reach others in those in that specific circumstances and my annoyance was because I didn't fit that description at all.
Until he started dish on strangers doing something different. Basically he had gone to buy something bulky and had used a ride share van to get it home. He told this point out how ride services can have good value you might not think about. This part was fine enough but then he started to make fun of others having hard time putting their purchases in their car. He was smart by having a suitable rent car while these poor idiots was getting his ass kicked by their crappy SUVs. That made it click, these aren't people who want to promote best use of their resources in their circumstances, they are actively hostile to other options.
To him ride share makes sense but why he assumes that would work for a random person over there. That they are doing a bad choice by not renting rather that struggling with packing that one time with an already available car. He does after all admit that renting costs of a trip are pretty high but can save money over long period of time if you only need a car infrequently. Plus tons of general insults and unflattering assumptions to these people and their cars, nothing to do with the ride share services being a good option. All pointing to me that these people are incredibly insecure, intolerant and selfish. They can't just do and advise what they see as good ideas, they have crush others options just because they are different.
@LaxerBRO 400 square feet is about 37 square meters, which is, oddly enough, about the footprint of my house. I have two and half floors, though, so roughly 1000 sq ft, which is what I'd consider a liveable size for two people and two cats. We used to live in a flat that was around 600 square and it was pretty nice, but definitely not something I'd consider the maximum allowable.
This is a common problem, actually. It's not (presumably) because his server was misconfigured, but because a lot of ISPs just blanket-ban most VPS-providers. I've had the same issue and I actually know what I'm doing when it comes to this shit. Microsoft still has my mail server blocked because they auto-block every IP my provider uses.
