So assuming the condos are in a "mixed use" zoned area that is supposedly
designed to allow (gasp!) a mix of residential and commercial developments,
what is the process then?
"Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" wrote:
>
> Brian Atkins wrote:
> >
> > To the people responding with choice A, do you disagree that noise/silence
> > in the surrounding air should not be considered to be some kind of publicly
> > shared infrastructure just like radio spectrum or the underlying water table?
> > Would you prefer it if everyone could blast away with their high powered
> > radio transmitters on any and all frequencies they wish? That just anyone
> > who wants to could dump toxic waste into the water table just next to your
> > farmland? Or should there be some kind of mechanism to handle disputes in
> > these physically shared things, either auctions or committees to arbitrate?
>
> I think that noise is a publicly shared infrastructure, which can be purchased
> just like radio frequencies, and I think that the current approximation to a
> mechanism for purchasing noise rights is called "zoning". There are
> incredibly loud areas where factories and airports are located, mildly loud
> urban areas, and sleepy suburbs. If you choose the convenience of living in a
> commercially zoned area with half a dozen bars already nearby, then you've
> also chosen to live with the noise. Even if someone is significantly
> increasing the amount of nearby noise, and thereby actually decreasing
> property values, the property owners have no "shared infrastructure" argument
> unless the noise goes above the legal limits for commercially zoned property -
> it was a risk that should have been factored into the initial buying decision.
>
> -- -- -- -- --
> Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/
> Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
-- Brian Atkins Director, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence http://www.singinst.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:19 MDT