Length is limited by platform length and width is limited by tunnel loading gauge and platform sizes. To increase the platform length, you have to do it at most if not all stations. Crowded stations are usually in desirable areas which make it harder to dig or acquire land.
> run more trains
For lines at capacity, I believe it's usually limited by trains dwell time. Longer and bigger trains take longer for people to safely board. To improve this on the train side, you can have more doors and bigger doors. Station platforms also need to be bigger, have more stairs, bigger walkways, etc. Longer trains also make it tougher for train drivers and station staff to open and close the doors safely.
Tough but not impossible problems but many solutions contain trade offs. Only surefire way is to build another line but that costs tons of money.
There are problems with rail privatization but I don't think this is one.
> Privatization results in requiring riders to sometimes exit a station of one company, go all the way up to ground level, walk a block or to two another different company station, and then ride another train.
I believe this is the result of different private companies operating physically separate lines, rather than some privatization activities? For example, Shinjuku has stations of JR East (result of JNR privatization), Keio (private), Odakyu (private), Toei (public), Tokyo Metro ("private" but owned by Japan gov and tokyo metro gov). Sure, JNR privatization is controversial but without that, Shinjuku is still a mess of different operators.
Are you suggesting the government turn back time and banned private companies owning rail or they should buy out and nationalize all rails companies?
> A government managed system wouldn't have this issue
Well, if it's 2 different government levels and 2 entities, the issue still exists. For example, to transfer between Tokyo Metro and Toei Subway, you might need to tap or a transfer ticket https://www.tokyometro.jp/lang_en/ticket/types/connection/in...
It's also possible for public and private companies to cooperate. Keikyu main line (private) does through running on Toei Asakusa line that allows the subway to have connections to both airports through private rails.
Nowadays, with IC cards, transferring between systems is a breeze. For the walking distance, nothing much you can do besides moving the track itself (done sometimes) or station redesign with better walkways and tunnels (done often).
I find Accuweather MinutecastTM quite good for the Northeast. I'm using Breezy Weather with them as the data source. Sometimes, I found their API data was not as updated as their website/app but most of the time, the API is good enough. Can't stand their app design and data collection.
I know I know they are not nice, just repackaging NWS data blah blah but after testing all other rain prediction services, Accuweather was the most accurate for where I am.
Dark Sky was the best though. RIP
Apple Weather on iOS looks pretty good but I haven't found a good app consuming AW API on Android.
I find Accuweather radar UI pretty good for manual forecasting because I can grab the slider and rapidly move it back and forth to see a timelapse of the precipitation. It's amazing how often huge cells pass to either side of our little town (also in Northeast) without a single drop to our name.
Yep, it's a straight up safety issue with all the scam ads. I pay for YouTube premium but sometimes my parents and grandparents don't log in, accidentally sign out, watch it on the browsers, etc that it's safer to block them all. It only takes one to get through and gen AI is not helping.
> thanks to that universal language, I can express my thoughts to most people in India, China, Japan, South America, etc due to having 1 common language.
My lazy ass wishes that English is enough to access those communities too. There are many cool and interesting developers, projects and communities only or mostly working in their native languages. One of the major motivation for me to learn Chinese now is to access those communities.
> Nevertheless, our close examination of his publications removes the ambiguity. The cover of his dissertation clearly delineates his family name from his compound given name, and in his final publication, he listed his last name as “Bui.” The preponderance of evidence suggests that he was Dr. Bùi, but the scientific literature misidentifies him as Dr. Phong.
> This also suggests that “Phong shading” is a misnomer, but for reasons that will likely remain unknown, Bùi did not contest the naming. While he may not have coined the eponym himself, he referenced it in his dissertation and final publication.
I'm nowhere near as smart but if something's going to be named after me, as a Vietnamese, please please please use my given name. Either given name or given name + middle name or full name. Considering he also used it himself, he was probably more ok about it than the author thinks.
I understand it's the custom in English speaking academia to use family name and I only want to speak for myself, not for all Vietnamese and especially someone from 50 years ago. I also have the most common family name so the sentiments of someone with a less common one might be different.
Funnily enough, on his Wikipedia page, they also note about this:
> In this Vietnamese name, the surname is Bui. In accordance with Vietnamese custom, this person should be referred to by the given name, Phong.
Probably a better stance. It was kind of a reach by the the Time's article's author.
I assume, and please correct me if I misrepresent your reason, that you're referring to the fact that most Vietnamese have last names from a very small pool?
For those unaware: The 10 most common last names in Vietnam makes up 85% of the population, and nearly half Nguyen alone. I looked it up and Bùi is far less common, but still represents 11% of the population...
For comparison, only .7% of the US population is named Smith.
So in terms of naming something so you get recognition, in Vietnam Bùi is about 16 times worse than Smith would be in the US... Of course, internationally it might have made relatively little difference.
(and if it's not on the list of falsehoods programmers might believe about names - I haven't checked - Vietnamese is one good reason why if anyone think sharding users by last name is a good idea, thinking names like Smith is the worst case, depending on their demographics they may be wildly wrong)
Yes, it's one of the reason. As a result, it's super rare to refer to someone by their family name in Vietnamese. Casually people use given names and formally people use full names.
Family names usually come up when referring to the whole family branch of 9-10+ generations like the Nguyễn family or the Bùi family. Because there are few family names, you often see family branches use family name+middle name of the first ancestor to be more specific.
I agree. The publishing tradition is [first name][last name], which should be followed for our convenience sake. But the author can choose whatever first and last name. What really matters is that, in a jungle of citations, the reader seeing the shortened name can pinpoint them specifically. While Eastern cultures may place less emphasis of differentiating using the middle name like Vietnam, the author can use Last-Mid as their Last (consistent with VN's tradition), or Mid-First as their First. Just use it consistently.
Length is limited by platform length and width is limited by tunnel loading gauge and platform sizes. To increase the platform length, you have to do it at most if not all stations. Crowded stations are usually in desirable areas which make it harder to dig or acquire land.
> run more trains
For lines at capacity, I believe it's usually limited by trains dwell time. Longer and bigger trains take longer for people to safely board. To improve this on the train side, you can have more doors and bigger doors. Station platforms also need to be bigger, have more stairs, bigger walkways, etc. Longer trains also make it tougher for train drivers and station staff to open and close the doors safely.
Tough but not impossible problems but many solutions contain trade offs. Only surefire way is to build another line but that costs tons of money.