While we should never expect public transit to be self funding removing fares removes the ability for transit funds to scale with ridership, there is a reason that farebox ratios are correlated with ridership.
It's self funding in places like Japan and Hong Kong, but these places also engage in value capture. Train services in these places are basically real estate companies with trains attached to them. They diversified by making train stations shopping malls.
In any case, cities can engage in value capture for public transportation. Just direct some of the property taxes collected directed to public transit. Even better would be some sort of LVT, ideally but not necessary 100% of the economic rent from land.
In any case, public transit should also engage in value capture on their own property. If they own a train station, they should consider building on top or adjacent to it spaces that they can then rent out to tenants. It's not only efficient but also serve the public and the local economy and making public transit more economical to run due to higher ridership.
NYC also has subway stations with intense commerce, e.g. the Columbus Circle, or some bits around Herald Square. As a regular user, I find this convenient.
Almost every smaller station shows ads on walls, too, and every train carriers ads inside.
I don't see why the subway specifically could not be self-sufficient, or even a profit center. Sadly, this is not so, because of very large expenses, not because of low revenue.
Brick and mortar shopping really seems to be struggling in the US since covid, though. It’s possible some transit systems could add malls above some of their stations, but a lot of cities still have persistently high retail vacancies, and even suburban malls aren’t what they were a few decades ago.
And urban malls and chain stores are frankly often depressing — awkward layouts translated imperfectly from suburban sprawl, along with obviously underpaid and burned out staff.
Selling food works well though. I won't mind grabbing some bagels right past the turnstiles, especially if it means not standing by a food truck outside when it's cold and drizzling.
What do you mean by employer subsidy here? Are you referring to the system where employers reimburse the costs of transit fees for commutes?
Many companies in Tokyo prevent their employees from commuting by car (legally commute is covered by workers comp insurance, and many companies do not elect the more expensive car coverage option) - so even in the absence of workers paying for the commute, public transit (or bike/walk) would be the only realistic option.
> They diversified by making train stations shopping malls.
Like airports in America. We should pursue a similar path for our rail stations and, frankly, ensure they are heading toward locations that are walkable and connected.
Sure, yet it also established a double standard. In my neck of the woods, most busses operate on municipal roads. Municipal roads are funded by municipal taxes, and the municipality does not have the right to charge fuel taxes. The revenue that they collect from drivers is from parking and parking permits in a tiny fraction of the city, as well as property taxes on the low value land used for parking lots. City council would face a bloodbath if they tried to increase revenues for road maintenance directly from road users. Never mind asking those users cover the cost of appropriating land and new road construction, which is being driven by the excessive use of vehicles that are occupied by one or two people. Yet transit users are typically expected to fund about half of transit operations. If they're lucky, the provincial or federal government will throw some money their way for new busses.
It's hard to draw a direct comparison because people who never drive still benefit significantly from the existence of the roads. It might be possible to drill down far enough so that it was charged directly to every use case for the road, but I bet it would end up in about the same place in the end but with a lot more bureaucracy.
That really was just the most absurd argument for Microsoft developers to engage in. It felt like a parody of the "optimisation is unnecessary because us developers are such Prima Donnas and simply toooooo expensive to lower ourselves to such levels" attitude that some people have.
He used a cache. A simple hashtable. That's it. He got an absurd speedup of something like hundreds of times faster.
What are developers smoking these days that they can't even envision ever doing something like this without undertaking a research program?
To this day people will debate this, as if there's a valid debate to be had!
"No, no, no, it's premature to optimise software that is... being released to a billion users in production."
"Casey is adding unnecessary complexity that will be hard to maintain... by using a fraction of the code Microsoft did to solve the same problem."
"It must be full of errors... well... other than the superior Unicode compliance."
"It's so much longer to develop high-performance code... the evidence is that it took Casey two weekends to write a nearly complete terminal emulator!"
Etc...
Look where we are today. Microsoft still steadfastly refuses to even look at Casey's solution, let alone adopt it wholesale. Years later there are still blog articles being written about the performance issues of the Windows Terminal.
PS: Notepad and Calculator got the same "treatment" and now struggle to keep up with key presses.
The only part of municipal/ regional bus network that is suitable for privatisation in a high labour cost country is contracting out operations. Ticketing, route planning andscheduling all should be under a central governmental authority. There is a reason that, outside of London, England has some of the worst bus services in the developed world
I feel like we need to move on from using the same test on models since as time goes on the information about these specific test is out there in the training data and while i am not saying that it's happened in this case there is nothing stopping model developers from adding extra data for theses tests directly in the training data to make their models seem better than they are
The one subtle difference I've noticed between Canadian and American English is on school grades. American say "first grade" where as Canada say "grade one".
He would still be unbelievably rich even if Meta went bankrupt. He is in the unique position to have majority control of one of the world's largest tech companies and can pretty much use it to do what ever he wants. I doubt he cares much about Facebook past it's ability to generate money at this point.
