Jackson Heights Life

The other day my wife and I had an interesting lunch at a restaurant on Junction Blvd south of 35th called Hola Namaste (sometimes given as Holla Namaste). It's a nice place run by a young guy named Vikram who is from Nepal and cooks an interesting selection of Indian, Nepali, Mexican and South American dishes under one roof. We started with chicken livers in a crisp, deep fried taco shell smothered in spicy cole slaw, which was very satisfying. Then there was a plate of momos, shaped more like Szechuan dumplings, that came with two dipping sauces representing the two poles of the restaurant's cuisine: a ramekin of creamy guacamole and another of peanut sauce. These were as good as any momos I've had anywhere in the neighborhood. After that we had "chicken soup," a pot au feu style thing consisting mainly of chicken legs, sections of corn cob, carrots and other vegetables with a little rich broth and a big side of rice. This was good too. With tax & tip, $34.

The menus (one Asian, the other Latin American) and the "specials" on the wall encompass a panoply of appealing stuff including many standards (palak paneer, salchipappa) and creative items such as guacamole tempura. It's not exactly cheap, given what you might expect, but you can get a taco combo for two (if you ask) that is a good deal. And we enjoyed the food. No idea how Vikram stays in business; nobody seems to eat there, pricing is weird (cup of coffee: $5), and the location seems off for what he is doing. Nonetheless I plan to go back, and for those who like takeout (I don't) it might be an interesting option because you can satisfy a variety of preferences. Or maybe go with the kids; they can eat tacos while you head for the Indian subcontinent. If you go, by all means say hi to Vikram.

PS--Apologies if this has place has been covered here before; I searched and found no sign of it.

The Wall Street Journal, in a fascinating report on Internet speeds, found that the high speeds offered by most providers are a waste of money. Most people, even entire families streaming all the time, use only a fraction of what is being paid for (which in turn isn't always being provided). Of course FIOS tried to sell you their most expensive plan. Here's an excerpt from the WSJ coverage of this, taken from probably the most relevant story (https://www.wsj.com/graphics/faster-internet-not-worth-it/)

“For many people they are not going to see huge differences between 50 Mbps, 100 Mbps and a gigabit per second,” said Nick Feamster, a University of Chicago network-performance expert and part of the research team on the Journal project. Some 61% of U.S. households had speeds of 100 Mbps or higher as of December 2018, according to research firm Kagan.

We found similar results across our 34 testers who ran five, six or seven streams at once. The eight users with speeds 100 Mbps or higher who had seven streams going used only about 7.1 Mbps of capacity, on average.

People who paid for even faster speeds still streamed video at about the same speeds as everyone else, resulting in their using a smaller portion of available bandwidth. One person with a 300 Mbps connection streamed at a median of 7.2 Mbps, using 2% of the capacity she pays for.

I have never been able to understand why NYC doesn't have resident only parking at least in some locations. What's the argument -against- resident permits?

I believe Forest Hills Gardens has had permit parking for years and probably some other areas do too. It's widespread in LA, where it  works as intended. I certainly wish we had it in Jackson Heights.

I don't know why anyone would try to build anything here. Note that the Bridgemarket project under the Manhattan side of the 59th St bridge took 22 years from the day a hapless developer signed a lease until the project finally opened to the public. Endless battles between city agencies, state legislature, community board, judges etc. I can't imagine the expense. There's a remarkable chronology (pp. 35-36 below) that reads like a satire. Very sobering.

https://www.rudybruneraward.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/04_bridgemarket.pdf

The palak paneer and the baingan bharta are spectacular!

This is all very confusing. When a chain like Walgreens wants to come into the community, we bitterly oppose it. And now that they're leaving, we're equally aghast. The idea that we are endangered by the departure of this utterly generic outlet (admittedly a useful source of overpriced toothpaste and fattening foods) seems a little far-fetched.

The Truth About Faster Internet: It's Not Worth It
Wall Street Journal Aug. 20, 2019
https://www.wsj.com/graphics/faster-internet-not-worth-it/

Americans are spending ever more for blazing internet speeds, on the promise that faster is better. Is that really the case?

For most people, the answer is no.

The Wall Street Journal studied the internet use of 53 of our journalists across the country, over a period of months, in coordination with researchers at Princeton University and the University of Chicago.

Our panelists used only a fraction of their available bandwidth to watch streaming services including Netflix, Amazon Prime Video and YouTube, even simultaneously. Quality didn’t improve much with higher speeds. Picture clarity was about the same. Videos didn’t launch quicker.

Broadband providers such as Comcast Corp., Charter Communications Inc. and AT&T Inc. are marketing speeds in the range of 250, 500 or even 1,000 megabits a second, often promising that streaming-video bingers will benefit. “Fast speeds for all of your shows,” declares one online ad from Comcast.

But for a typical household, the benefits of paying for more than 100 megabits a second are marginal at best, according to the researchers. That means many households are paying a premium for services they don’t need.

etc.