I'm not denying that there are people who want to live there. It's obvious there are (and that there are growth trends, particularly as snowbirds seem to be discarding Florida as their first choice).
The dispute is about scale: a couple of million retirees equal a lot of speculative housing value, but they don't justify a megaproject to deliver water to the middle of the desert. That would require population migration on a scale not seen in over a century in the US.
In some neighbourhoods in the Netherlands people put fake '30km/h' signs on their roadside garbage bins. Those are not the official limits, but will be picked up by traffic sign recognition algorithms...
Yeah that's covered in the article, but only applies to subdivisions of more than 5 houses. So the builders build larger anyway with ownership hidden in a shell game of LLCs to get around the regulation and build without that 100 year water supply.
wget --spider --force-html $(
for i in {1..1024};
do
echo "https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc${i}";
done ) 2>&1 |
egrep '(https.*rfc|awaiting response)' |
grep -B1 '404 Not Found' |
grep -v '404 Not Found'
Above RFC-2000 or so, the pattern of omissions starts to look more deliberate, suggesting reserved values:
people want to live where it’s sunny and warm