There wasn't even enough assembly space this year, it was bursting at the seams. Sadly I think CCH is just too small for this conference. There's a much bigger conference space space down the street, but the rumor is that going back to Leipzig (where it was held during the renovation of CCH) is back in discussion. That place was too big though.
The big reason for tunnel 3 isn't new population growth, it's so that the other tunnels can be shut down for maintenance and inspection. NYC's population is more or less stable over the last 90 years.
The Verazano is already more expensive than congestion pricing. It's cheaper to drive to Manhattan from Jersey than Brooklyn via Staten Island. Never heard any Jersey driver complain though.
There's a large (long time) movement to do this to lower Manhattan, the most public transit connected area in the US (probably North America, definitely up there in the world). It's getting pick up again.
I had a lecture from the main researcher of that paper when I was in undergrad, fantastic lecturer and very interesting topic. The whole class actually applauded him after he finished (that isn't something that happens in US universities usually).
only those that carry the shopping trolleys up/downstairs, designed so the wheels get locked into place.
I have never seen a flat one in anything else but airports or connections between other mass transit transports such as metros and trains. Definitely not in big box stores as they would be inconvenient and slower than pushing the trolley in the flat.
This doesn't work in cities. The vast majority of peoples movement are not immediately necessary. They can wait 10-15 minutes (or plan ahead) for efficiency. This also cuts down on costs for everyone.
On demand is bad but not for that reason. people have places to be and are bad at planning. You should be running every 5 minutes so even if they are running late it still isn't very long until you get there.
every 10-15 minutes is cheaper and so because of cost you are often forced to be this bad (or worse) just to be affordable, but it isn't what anyone wants and people who use such systems will dream of ways to make a car work where they are
I think it would also be more interesting if you could really approach it and have the time to look at it like other pieces.
My memories of the Mona Lisa is of a rather small paint behind dirty glasses with a large group of japanese tourists grouped in front of it and I simply didn't have the patience to wait and I just really glanced at it while passing by.
Also like most paints of its age, it is seriously damaged, colors aren't the original one and paint is cracked. I wish there was a way to actually enjoy in person those paints as they were when they were delivered to their customers.
My memories of the few times I've been to the Louvre are exactly the same as yours.
Musee d'Orsay down the river is a much better museum in my opinion and the one I never skip when I'm in Paris, the Louvre I'll only go to if someone I'm with has never been and really wants to.
It's a bit of a paradox because in a way d'Orsay is much more “pop” than Louvre. I think people would generally enjoy d'Orsay more than historic focused Louvre.
reply