What Are You Doing Right Now
-
In the US the government roles are split up. In China building a planned city is most likely going to be overseen by the central government. In the US it is more likely to be overseen by a state. But the Fed does this as well. And, of course, in both private ones happen, too.
-
Digging into this issue more (with @Dashrender), a few things we're considering:
- Did I upgrade from Windows 7 to 10 (IDK)
- Do I have the media he has (appears so, but we're working on confirming this)
He hasn't removed anything from Windows 10 on his image, and his boots fine. So it must be something with the way this is configured.
-
@DustinB3403 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
Digging into this issue more (with @Dashrender), a few things we're considering:
- Did I upgrade from Windows 7 to 10 (IDK)
- Do I have the media he has (appears so, but we're working on confirming this)
He hasn't removed anything from Windows 10 on his image, and his boots fine. So it must be something with the way this is configured.
Correction, I've created sysprep'ed images from 1507 and 1511 and deployed them with no issues that Dustin has (so has JB). I don't believe I have done this yet with AU (1607).
I'm currently building a new install just to test this.
-
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@coliver said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
http://www.bbc.com/future/slideshow-gallery/20170224-the-eerie-cities-where-nobody-lives
it's nearly impossible for me to imagine this. The government I guess just owns everything, so they can just spend without concern in the hopes that their spending will ultimately create economic growth...
You word that in a very strange way. It's simply called "investing."
I suppose when you own everything, it is a form of investing. It's just so foreign to what I think is the US way of doing things... the US government doesn't own much, I know there is HUD housing, etc, but it's impossible for me to think that the US Gov could/would invest in building a whole city.
I'm not following? Many of these "ghost" cities were built from international loans. One of the big issues that China is running/ran into is that banks, and some nations, aren't willing to continue loaning money for these cities. A lot of them aren't complete yet and without external funding they will probably remain that way.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
US has about 20 cities like this planned to be built currently.
OH? List? citations?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_planned_cities#United_States
Huh, I knew Raleigh was a "planned" city wasn't aware that Charleston was as well.
-
OK i stand corrected on how they were funded - but funding them in the hopes that people would just want to move in with no actual presold reason seems like a huge gamble.. one they clearly lost on.
-
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
OK i stand corrected on how they were funded - but funding them in the hopes that people would just want to move in with no actual presold reason seems like a huge gamble.. one they clearly lost on.
You could say the same of Las Vegas too. Creating a paradise inside of the desert seemed crazy at the time
-
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
OK i stand corrected on how they were funded - but funding them in the hopes that people would just want to move in with no actual presold reason seems like a huge gamble.. one they clearly lost on.
Well, their population had been increasing 2-3% year over year beginning in the 1960s right up until the 90s and 00s. Not saying you're wrong but there was no indication at the time that the rate would slow down.
-
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
OK i stand corrected on how they were funded - but funding them in the hopes that people would just want to move in with no actual presold reason seems like a huge gamble.. one they clearly lost on.
Did they? They created loads and loads of jobs to build them, and you only know of the empty ones right this moment, you don't know anything about how many were made, how many were wild successes, if these are about to be moved into, etc. You don't have anything to base the opinion that they gambled and failed. Sure, that might be true, but there is no reason to determine that it is so. It's massively more complex than "the building is empty."
-
@wirestyle22 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
OK i stand corrected on how they were funded - but funding them in the hopes that people would just want to move in with no actual presold reason seems like a huge gamble.. one they clearly lost on.
You could say the same of Las Vegas too. Creating a paradise inside of the desert seemed crazy at the time
Wasn't the government there, I don't think.
-
@coliver said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
OK i stand corrected on how they were funded - but funding them in the hopes that people would just want to move in with no actual presold reason seems like a huge gamble.. one they clearly lost on.
Well, their population had been increasing 2-3% year over year beginning in the 1960s right up until the 90s and 00s. Not saying you're wrong but there was no indication at the time that the rate would slow down.
Or that these won't be needed in a year or two. Just because they built them early might have just been because they felt that that was when they could get the loans, or build them cheaply, or just that they feel that being prepared is better than being caught off guard.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@wirestyle22 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
OK i stand corrected on how they were funded - but funding them in the hopes that people would just want to move in with no actual presold reason seems like a huge gamble.. one they clearly lost on.
You could say the same of Las Vegas too. Creating a paradise inside of the desert seemed crazy at the time
Wasn't the government there, I don't think.
No... that was organized crime for the most part.
-
@JaredBusch said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@DustinB3403 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@DustinB3403 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
I'm creating a Windows 10 image, following this guide here.
I get the same error at startup, gotta look at the error log and see what is being complained about.
That guide is is saying to set the powershell execution policy to unrestricted for chocolatey. That is flat not accurate, so that would acall into question just how accurate the rest of it is.
It's weird that Chocolately dropped the install line from a command prompt and specifically say that the execution mode can't be restricted, but they don't tell you what it needs to be to work.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@coliver said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
OK i stand corrected on how they were funded - but funding them in the hopes that people would just want to move in with no actual presold reason seems like a huge gamble.. one they clearly lost on.
Well, their population had been increasing 2-3% year over year beginning in the 1960s right up until the 90s and 00s. Not saying you're wrong but there was no indication at the time that the rate would slow down.
Or that these won't be needed in a year or two. Just because they built them early might have just been because they felt that that was when they could get the loans, or build them cheaply, or just that they feel that being prepared is better than being caught off guard.
No argument there. I think they are better on the prepared side... having planned cities sure beats a lot of the traditional American cities that just sprawled like crazy.
-
China adds 7m people per year to their population. That ghost city is for just 1m. The amount of housing that China has to build per year is something like 10m (assuming some amount has to be torn down.) In a population of 1.3bn people, having a little spot that could hold 1m be empty temporarily shouldn't be shocking, it should be assumed. The amount of construction needed to keep up with a population of that size is insane.
Compare to Dallas or Panama City. Both are huge cities... full of empty buildings. It's not all in one spot like in that one city, but the effect is the same. Rampant development way, way ahead of needed capacity. Dallas has something like 20% of the city empty. China is nothing like that. PC is like 40% or something insane. Trump Tower alone is a building like that, famously empty in Panama City with no prospects.
-
@coliver said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@coliver said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
OK i stand corrected on how they were funded - but funding them in the hopes that people would just want to move in with no actual presold reason seems like a huge gamble.. one they clearly lost on.
Well, their population had been increasing 2-3% year over year beginning in the 1960s right up until the 90s and 00s. Not saying you're wrong but there was no indication at the time that the rate would slow down.
Or that these won't be needed in a year or two. Just because they built them early might have just been because they felt that that was when they could get the loans, or build them cheaply, or just that they feel that being prepared is better than being caught off guard.
No argument there. I think they are better on the prepared side... having planned cities sure beats a lot of the traditional American cities that just sprawled like crazy.
Yes, loads of advantages to it. A lot of developed Asia benefits from awesomely planned cities.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
China adds 7m people per year to their population. That ghost city is for just 1m. The amount of housing that China has to build per year is something like 10m (assuming some amount has to be torn down.) In a population of 1.3bn people, having a little spot that could hold 1m be empty temporarily shouldn't be shocking, it should be assumed. The amount of construction needed to keep up with a population of that size is insane.
Compare to Dallas or Panama City. Both are huge cities... full of empty buildings. It's not all in one spot like in that one city, but the effect is the same. Rampant development way, way ahead of needed capacity. Dallas has something like 20% of the city empty. China is nothing like that. PC is like 40% or something insane. Trump Tower alone is a building like that, famously empty in Panama City with no prospects.
One of the pictured cities (that they haven't finished yet) has a planned capacity of 9 million. Pretty cool that they are building a variety of cities with different sizes.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@coliver said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@coliver said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
OK i stand corrected on how they were funded - but funding them in the hopes that people would just want to move in with no actual presold reason seems like a huge gamble.. one they clearly lost on.
Well, their population had been increasing 2-3% year over year beginning in the 1960s right up until the 90s and 00s. Not saying you're wrong but there was no indication at the time that the rate would slow down.
Or that these won't be needed in a year or two. Just because they built them early might have just been because they felt that that was when they could get the loans, or build them cheaply, or just that they feel that being prepared is better than being caught off guard.
No argument there. I think they are better on the prepared side... having planned cities sure beats a lot of the traditional American cities that just sprawled like crazy.
Yes, loads of advantages to it. A lot of developed Asia benefits from awesomely planned cities.
And they get away from the terrible suburb ideas that we have. At least from I can tell.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
China adds 7m people per year to their population. That ghost city is for just 1m. The amount of housing that China has to build per year is something like 10m (assuming some amount has to be torn down.) In a population of 1.3bn people, having a little spot that could hold 1m be empty temporarily shouldn't be shocking, it should be assumed. The amount of construction needed to keep up with a population of that size is insane.
Ok that makes sense - but was the building happening before these new cities?
in rural super low cost situations, right? -
@coliver said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
China adds 7m people per year to their population. That ghost city is for just 1m. The amount of housing that China has to build per year is something like 10m (assuming some amount has to be torn down.) In a population of 1.3bn people, having a little spot that could hold 1m be empty temporarily shouldn't be shocking, it should be assumed. The amount of construction needed to keep up with a population of that size is insane.
Compare to Dallas or Panama City. Both are huge cities... full of empty buildings. It's not all in one spot like in that one city, but the effect is the same. Rampant development way, way ahead of needed capacity. Dallas has something like 20% of the city empty. China is nothing like that. PC is like 40% or something insane. Trump Tower alone is a building like that, famously empty in Panama City with no prospects.
One of the pictured cities (that they haven't finished yet) has a planned capacity of 9 million. Pretty cool that they are building a variety of cities with different sizes.
50% bigger than the DFW. Now that's crazy.
