Sid Kapur
@sid-kap.bsky.social
ML engineer, interested in housing/transit/history/econ
📍Greater Boerum Hill Historic District, USA
📍Greater Boerum Hill Historic District, USA
The Anthropic Biology of a LLM paper had examples of writing poems where at the start of a line, the KV cache already pointed toward words it might want to end the line with (and I think the set of words narrowed as it got closer to the end of the line)
October 16, 2025 at 5:53 AM
The Anthropic Biology of a LLM paper had examples of writing poems where at the start of a line, the KV cache already pointed toward words it might want to end the line with (and I think the set of words narrowed as it got closer to the end of the line)
this is like, playing all the diatonic triads in sequence?
September 30, 2025 at 5:21 AM
this is like, playing all the diatonic triads in sequence?
SB 35 doesn't let you ignore the city's inclusionary rate
leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_...
leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_...
September 29, 2025 at 4:45 AM
SB 35 doesn't let you ignore the city's inclusionary rate
leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_...
leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_...
Rise and Fall of American Growth, p. 114 has this chart
September 27, 2025 at 5:35 AM
Rise and Fall of American Growth, p. 114 has this chart
Wake up babe new Jeremy Bernstein just dropped
September 27, 2025 at 2:23 AM
Wake up babe new Jeremy Bernstein just dropped
Can you make these public?
September 26, 2025 at 5:20 PM
Can you make these public?
Ahh okay thanks, that makes sense!
September 24, 2025 at 11:25 PM
Ahh okay thanks, that makes sense!
September 24, 2025 at 9:10 PM
Both cases refer to the "aggregate density" or "total capacity for units and floor area" as specified in Section 65912.157, and 65912.157 makes no reference to low-resource areas
September 24, 2025 at 9:08 PM
Both cases refer to the "aggregate density" or "total capacity for units and floor area" as specified in Section 65912.157, and 65912.157 makes no reference to low-resource areas
My read is that either you meet 50% of SB 79 capacity throughout the city, and then all low-income sites are exempt, or you meet 40% of SB 79 capacity near a majority low-resource stop, and then other sites around that stop are exempt
(the word "low resource" is not used anywhere else in the bill)
(the word "low resource" is not used anywhere else in the bill)
September 24, 2025 at 9:07 PM
My read is that either you meet 50% of SB 79 capacity throughout the city, and then all low-income sites are exempt, or you meet 40% of SB 79 capacity near a majority low-resource stop, and then other sites around that stop are exempt
(the word "low resource" is not used anywhere else in the bill)
(the word "low resource" is not used anywhere else in the bill)
I'm not sure. TOC only gives a 35-80% density increase. It does nothing in single-family zones, and in duplex zones (which are a big fraction of South LA near transit) it only allows 3-4 units.
To comply, TOC would have to allow 40-60 du/acre on average across all SB 79 sites
To comply, TOC would have to allow 40-60 du/acre on average across all SB 79 sites
September 24, 2025 at 7:22 PM
I'm not sure. TOC only gives a 35-80% density increase. It does nothing in single-family zones, and in duplex zones (which are a big fraction of South LA near transit) it only allows 3-4 units.
To comply, TOC would have to allow 40-60 du/acre on average across all SB 79 sites
To comply, TOC would have to allow 40-60 du/acre on average across all SB 79 sites
They can, but because low resource is like 75% of the transit stops in LA, they would need to go to 200% of SB 79 density in the non-low-resource stops to reach 50% of SB 79 zoned capacity overall
September 24, 2025 at 7:14 PM
They can, but because low resource is like 75% of the transit stops in LA, they would need to go to 200% of SB 79 density in the non-low-resource stops to reach 50% of SB 79 zoned capacity overall
3 stories in all single family areas near transit statewide (and taller if you use SDBL) is already a huge accomplishment and would have been unthinkable 5 years ago! I think of that as the main accomplishment, and the fact that it'll be 5-7 stories in the 2030s as the cherry on top
September 24, 2025 at 3:50 PM
3 stories in all single family areas near transit statewide (and taller if you use SDBL) is already a huge accomplishment and would have been unthinkable 5 years ago! I think of that as the main accomplishment, and the fact that it'll be 5-7 stories in the 2030s as the cherry on top
IMO the low resource exclusions aren't that big, it just means cities can pass an alternative plan this RHNA cycle with 40% of SB79 density in low resource areas and 50% in other areas (or <40% in low resource if they do >50% in other areas). And they still have to get to 100% in the 2030s
September 24, 2025 at 3:45 PM
IMO the low resource exclusions aren't that big, it just means cities can pass an alternative plan this RHNA cycle with 40% of SB79 density in low resource areas and 50% in other areas (or <40% in low resource if they do >50% in other areas). And they still have to get to 100% in the 2030s
is that the sequel to Her?
September 21, 2025 at 12:50 AM
is that the sequel to Her?
Wait that's awesome!! IIRC Seattle housing production fell when they added neighborhood villages and MHA at the same time, great that 5 years later people agree the latter was a bad idea
September 21, 2025 at 12:01 AM
Wait that's awesome!! IIRC Seattle housing production fell when they added neighborhood villages and MHA at the same time, great that 5 years later people agree the latter was a bad idea
Why don't these zones have MHA? So formerly single-family lots don't have MHA but formerly commercial/multifamily lots have it?
September 20, 2025 at 11:33 PM
Why don't these zones have MHA? So formerly single-family lots don't have MHA but formerly commercial/multifamily lots have it?
This is wild to me, but really good to know! If this pattern continues to hold after this rezoning I'm sure Building Code Twitter will have great case studies to motivate further building code improvements
(and anti-YIMBYs will have great examples to point to about why upzoning doesn't work)
(and anti-YIMBYs will have great examples to point to about why upzoning doesn't work)
September 20, 2025 at 11:32 PM
This is wild to me, but really good to know! If this pattern continues to hold after this rezoning I'm sure Building Code Twitter will have great case studies to motivate further building code improvements
(and anti-YIMBYs will have great examples to point to about why upzoning doesn't work)
(and anti-YIMBYs will have great examples to point to about why upzoning doesn't work)
So FAR 1.6 townhouses are more profitable than FAR 2 apartments? Is the fee-simple/detached premium just that big??
(Would 6 or 8 larger units be more profitable than 10 1000 sq ft units?)
(Would 6 or 8 larger units be more profitable than 10 1000 sq ft units?)
September 20, 2025 at 6:27 AM
So FAR 1.6 townhouses are more profitable than FAR 2 apartments? Is the fee-simple/detached premium just that big??
(Would 6 or 8 larger units be more profitable than 10 1000 sq ft units?)
(Would 6 or 8 larger units be more profitable than 10 1000 sq ft units?)
whoa that's insane!! what's the typical SFH lot size? and how much MHA is required?
September 20, 2025 at 5:25 AM
whoa that's insane!! what's the typical SFH lot size? and how much MHA is required?