Re: the power of junk, Is Parallel Programming Hard, And, If So, What Can You Do About It?

On 5/24/2025 3:38 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:

BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> writes:

On 5/23/2025 12:34 PM, BGB wrote:

On 5/23/2025 12:03 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:

BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> writes:

On 5/23/2025 9:21 AM, John Levine wrote:

According to Scott Lurndal <slp53@pacbell.net>:

Don’t you have regulations, or at least discouragements, against
e-waste
going to landfill?

>
Yes, in the last two decades.   A quarter century ago, not so much.

>
This is 'Murica, pretty much everything goes in the trash here...

>
Nonsense.

>
It's sort of true. In my town they pick up paper and containers and
yard waste
at the curb but I have to take electronics down to the recycling
dump. Most
people don't bother.
>

>
Theoretically, they pick up recycling (paper and plastic), but whether
or not they bother is another matter. Usually the garbage trucks come by
and empty both bins, so it might not make much difference.

>
There are trucks that have two holding areas, so they can make
the trip with one truck rather than two.  In my rural neighborhood,
there are three trucks - trash, recycling and greenwaste.  I have
the smallest trash can they offer and it takes me two to three
weeks to fill it.
>

>
No greenwaste trucks, one has to take any tree branches or similar down
to the greenwaste place themselves, if not burn them.
>
The area I am in, isn't really either urban or rural I think.
IIRC, yard here is around 2.5 acre, whereas a neighbor has somewhere
around 8 acres (so a much bigger yard).
>
Another neighbor (across a different fence), having a much smaller yard
(around 1 acre).
>
Contrast, say, in suburbs or housing developments where the houses are
basically right next to each other with very little yard space.
>

>
Well, I am now not so sure about my area estimates...
   I think my numbers were a bit off.
>
>
But, as I understand it:
   1/4 acre, typical for suburbs;
     Much of the lot is taken up by the house itself.
     Yard is mostly superficial (*1).

 Depends on suburb and when the subdevelopment was
built.  70's, a lot size in a large suburb in California might
reach 6000 square feet (100' x 60), 1/7 acre.   A typical
home might have a footprint of 1000-1200 square
feet (perhaps 1600 square feet including second
story).   That leaves 4400- 5000 square feet for yard,
driveway, etc.
 Yards in the midwest are somewhat larger.
 In the 2020's, the lot size in a new development
will be much smaller in large metro areas, perhaps
4000 sq ft, if that, and likely to be townhomes or
condos.
 

 From what I have seen, the land footprint is almost entirely house.
Like, there is maybe a 5 foot gap from one to the next, not much more.
   Back yard nearly non existent, and front yard is maybe 8 or 10 feet.
 From what I have seem, typical construction looks like:
   Foundation is usually concrete or similar;
   A wood frame is built;
   Chicken wire is added around the frame;
   A sheathing is applied, typically has "Tyvek" in big letters;
   Various siding or similar is applied to the exterior.
     Faux bricks appears to be a popular option.
     Like, they have a sort of paneling with brick-like tiles.
But, yeah, seems my initial estimate of "acre" was a little off...
It was in effect a somewhat larger unit of area than I was initially thinking.
But, I was also working off the initial assumption that the stereotypical housing-development houses were 1/4 acre, and not like 1/8 or 1/10 or something, ...

In my rural area (1975 vintage), most lots are one hectare (2.54 acres);
the neighboring township has a 5 acre minimum.   My lot measures
approximately 200' by 600'.
 

Yeah, I am realizing where I am is probably closer to suburb territory. Which sorta makes sense. Still a lot of houses and other buildings around here.
Not really what I think of as "rural", namely the traditional image of lots of farms, animals, etc.
I think the houses around here were mostly built in the 1980s or something.
Not really "urban", as typically implied by people living in high-rise buildings, with crowds of people walking around in front.
I think not so much of this in Tulsa though. There is only a small area with high-rise buildings, right at the city center, and I think most of these are office/administrative type buildings.
Otherwise, whole rest of the city is mostly flat, mostly 1 or 2 story buildings. And, a lot of parking lots. Like, dunno, maybe half the land area is parking lots?...
Looks like on a lot of plots of land, it is 50-75% parking lot.
...