Talking to girls at bars is honestly not the socially unacceptable thing you’re treating it as being. Bars are where people-particularly single people-go to meet other people. Just talking to someone at a bar doesn’t make you a creep; when you actually start being creepy, not taking a hint, being overly pushy when you haven’t gotten any reciprocation, not noticing social cues that they don’t want to talk to you, etc.; that’s when you become a creep. If a girl goes to a bar and takes any attention whatsoever as being creeped on, that’s on them frankly.

If you follow all the social rules for not “being creepy” ever in any situation, I’m sorry, but you’re probably gonna stay single for a long time. It’s just a sad reality of human behavior that the line between flirting and creeping is very very thin and depends on being very conscious of how the other person is perceiving you.

Not sure but it’s outrageous, I’d call the mayor’s office

There’s only one.

Used to love Wally’s pre-Covid. Now I can’t make time for the hassle, but I’m glad it’s still there

Genuinely amazing to me that anybody actually needs to learn this firsthand. It seems extremely obvious.

I remember looking for an apartment a few years ago I asked a realtor to give me the behind the scenes on the worst companies in Boston. Obviously Alpha was the first one he mentioned. Sorry you’re dealing with that, I just wish students like you did more research because no offense but you’re kind of the reason companies like them have been able to survive for so long-they prey on uninformed students who don’t know to avoid them like the plague. But hey, if you can give them some headaches now you’ve got my complete support!

That’s my point lol

Dude, if multiple cars are doing it in a single month, you can’t simply blame recklessness. That’s insane. I don’t know whether the angled barrier was added on brattle st or not, but either way it demonstrates the obvious problem-people are unfamiliar with these things, they’re not visible enough, and they’re causing accidents. The lawsuits these things will generate are going to be wild.

What if the barrier is under snow?

How fast do you think you need to go to do some serious damage?

Downvoted even though these literally lead to people flipping their fucking cars lol

Wayyyy harder to hop a normal curb at speed than one of these things

Black consciousness having independent existence which all observers have to acknowledge. This is what I don’t understand about relativism-it’s fine to be open-minded, unserious, and “transdisciplinary” if you like at one point, but what do you do when the various cultures and philosophies you’re approaching open-mindedly conflict with one another? Because they do conflict, all the time. Do you believe multiple contradictory things and deny nothing? That seems to veer from open-mindedness into simple mindlessness.

In theory that appears to be Gordon’s suggestion, but it’s pretty obvious that he picks favorites (“Black consciousness”) and opposes their contraries (“white narcissism”) like everybody else in the real world.

Total head-scratcher. Why are all the rules up for interpretation, but black consciousness has ontological status? This whole thesis boils down to the belief that you can’t actually say anything meaningful.

Assuming you’re actually responding to my comment and not the general noises you perceive me making, you’re not talking about making municipal roads safer, you’re talking about completely eliminating cars and trucks lol. Not only would that destroy Cambridge’s economy, it would remove the livelihoods of everyone who depends on those roads to make a living. I get the problem, but part of living in a complex society is compromise.

I’m not only for sustainability and livable neighborhoods in theory; the problem is always one of implementation in a complex and multifaceted reality in which things are already operating a certain way. If what you really mean is I’m only for sustainability and livable neighborhoods for overpaid tech workers and college students, and not for anybody who’s been priced out of the area by said people, then no, I’m not even for that in theory, nor should you be. It stuns me how quickly self-proclaimed progressive people will all but tell working class folks to go fuck themselves as soon as tolerating their existence becomes even slightly inconvenient. If one wanted to reduce cars, the answer is not merely changing infrastructure-you have to totally restructure the economy such that those cars aren’t necessary, not just pretend they’re already unnecessary and willfully ignore anyone for whom that isn’t already true. This is sort of like trying to end police violence by defunding or disbanding police departments without doing any of the other things necessary to prevent the obvious bad consequences of taking such a step. Changes like these aren’t simple, and trying to skip to the end goal from day one always results in disaster.

I’m all about sustainability and the desire to make neighborhoods more livable, but the idea that cars aren’t still needed in a place like Cambridge requires a pretty extreme ignorance of what many people’s daily lives are like. Setting aside contractors and the need for trucks to get in and out to make deliveries, it’s also just the case that many of the people who work in the Cambridge area don’t live there or anywhere near it, because we can’t afford to. There’s lots of demand for manual labor of various kinds in the city, but nobody seems to consider that if those laborers want to be able to afford a family and a house, that requires moving 25+ miles away, and a schedule that totally rules out relying on the commuter rail. I grew up in Somerville and I work as an arborist out of Malden-most of our clients are in Cambridge. If I ever want to buy a house in the MA area, I’ll be forced to do what basically everyone else at my company has done past a certain age: move to NH or RI and commute every day. I’m fairly confident the same can be said for quite a few people who work in Cambridge. That’s obviously a broader problem and not one that can be solved at the municipal level, but at any rate I suppose that’s why I suspect this will remain an ongoing problem for the rest of our lives, or at least so long as Cambridge is a desirable and thereby unaffordable area and cars don’t fly.

This is one of the big problems with this argument. Right on red is only unsafe if people are driving badly and failing to check their mirrors/blind spot before turning. It’s true that people will always drive badly to some degree, but it’s not clear what the limits of that line of reasoning are. Cars are dangerous-we accept this because of the level of convenience they afford. You decrease their convenience, then you decrease their danger, yes, but at a certain point you’re just preventing them from carrying out their function. I feel like the priority ought to be on finding ways to improve people’s driving ability, because at least in Cambridge it’s often pretty scary (source: I drive a truck around Cambridge most days of the week).