this post was submitted on 01 Dec 2023
694 points (98.1% liked)

Technology

70995 readers
5126 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 71 points 2 years ago (6 children)

alternatively we could get rid of car dependency

[–] [email protected] 60 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That's fine for people who live in cities (which I acknowledge is a lot of people), but for people who live in smaller more remote and more rural places, it will never be possible to fullly be free of personal vehicles.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Maybe, but I feel like that ship has sailed in the US. Both for practical/economical reasons and because will resist. If half the people fought against wearing masks to protect vulnerable people from covid, good luck getting them to give up their "single family home with a yard + 2 cars” lifestyle. For those fortunate enough to have a single family home, that is.

I’m not saying it SHOULD be this way, and I’m not arguing against reducing cars with public transit and walkable/bikeable towns. However, from my perspective inside suburbia that borders rural areas, electrification of vehicles and supplying the grid with renewables is 1000x more likely as the path to fix this stuff environmentally.

And to get rid of cars for non-environmental reasons, I think that will be even more difficult. I mean, I visited Sweden earlier this year and for all the progressive stuff they’re way ahead of us on, there are still cars everywhere. They are smaller, more sensible cars with a much larger proportion being electric, but cars just the same.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 years ago (1 children)

We are screwed in the US because one side is actively and honestly against transit. The other side plays transit lip service but their actions prove they only want transit as a way to funnel money to some supporter (and so projects cost far too much and what we have runs bad schedules)

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago

Yeah… essentially, one side is bad faith crazy trying to burn it all down, and the other side is full of politicians.

They are not tHe SaMe, but neither is pushing hard for it. But at least some slow progress may be possible if the typical politicians stay in power.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Start small, support deregulating zoning so people can build more dense housing, and small corner shops in residential areas, that way it's not so far to go places. Support bike lanes so people can ride safely if they want to ride. Support work from home to prevent people from having to go anywhere in the first place.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago

You make a good point bringing up WFH. The speed of the internet these days should allow us to reduce demand for transit rather then looking for the best way to meet that demand.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 years ago

Think of the shareholders!

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

If we started now, we'd be ready in a couple decades in all but the most compact metro areas. And that's after we build the requisite political will. The US fucked itself hard leaning into cars as transport.

But that's reality for most of us living in the burbs where the schools are better and the neighborhoods are better for kid stuff.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

Yes. One alternative is communal traffic. People are just to lazy so they can't wait for it. If every car was indeed banned, gues how good the communal traffic would then be. Since the need increase, a lot. They would be going a lot often and suddenly there are no more cars blocking the roads. Also note that you would not have to be driving so you could do other stuff than looking at the road. And you dont have to save up money for the cars. No need to fix the car when it breaks. No need to find a gas station in time. Just less things to think about. Just look at how the flying business work today, no average people own their own plane. But still people make use of communal planes.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

My city (Houston) had a bus system that goes everywhere, but the sheer size and the lack of logical routing makes it hard to use. My friend could drive 20 minutes to work (but cannot drive because of a mental disability) or take multiple buses for 3 hours each way. She now rides an e-bike, but it still takes nearly an hour and she is literally risking her life because there are no bike lanes. Plus the cost of the bike was $3000 and it regularly needs maintenance.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

Nothing beats covinience. If it's easy, people will pay up. That means you are right, that if the communal traffic improves as you say, it would get alot more people using it.

But unfortunately, cars are just so, so convinient, it's almost impossible to beat, if you don't straight up outlaw them.