61–70 of 293 posts
So they'll default to showing directions for biking, walking, and transit?
So it'll only show walking directions?
I get that you're being flippant, but I did have a coworker who calculated the carbon footprint of his commute for various modes of transport, including walking. He came to the conclusion that, given the average amount of CO2 produced per calorie consumed, riding an e-bike was actually the lowest-impact way.
The important paragraph that most people probably care about: Soon, Google Maps will default to the route with the lowest carbon footprint when it has approximately the same ETA as the fastest route. In cases where the eco-friendly route could significantly increase your ETA, we’ll let you compare the relative CO2 impact between routes so you can choose. Always want the fastest route? That’s OK too — simply adjust yo…
This is a great example of why I figured Google Maps for navigation. I don't use Maps to express my environmental values, I use it to get from A to B the fastest way. If they default to something else, they are actively getting in the way of why I would use their product. I have no interest in activist software.
Be very interesting to see the unintended consequences of this. More traffic in areas not normally use to it, councils changing road design to deal with the new amount of traffic.. etc
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I get that you're being flippant, but I did have a coworker who calculated the carbon footprint of his commute for various modes of transport, including walking. He came to the conclusion that, given the average amount of CO2 produced per calorie consumed, riding an e-bike was actually the lowest-impact way.
I have read that cyclists who only eat beef generate more CO2 per mile than a hybrid car, though that presumably that ignores all the carbon cost of building cars and car infrastructure. Bikes are still better in pretty much every way. https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/are-meat-eating-cyc...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a great example of why I figured Google Maps for navigation. I don't use Maps to express my environmental values, I use it to get from A to B the fastest way. If they default to something else, they are actively getting in the way of why I would use their product. I have no interest in activist software.
Do you believe humans are causing climate change? If so, how do you envision it should be addressed that doesn't involve us changing our habits?
The important paragraph that most people probably care about: Soon, Google Maps will default to the route with the lowest carbon footprint when it has approximately the same ETA as the fastest route. In cases where the eco-friendly route could significantly increase your ETA, we’ll let you compare the relative CO2 impact between routes so you can choose. Always want the fastest route? That’s OK too — simply adjust yo…
This is a great example of why I figured Google Maps for navigation. I don't use Maps to express my environmental values, I use it to get from A to B the fastest way. If they default to something else, they are actively getting in the way of why I would use their product. I have no interest in activist software.
No they aren't. They're being completely transparent about this and giving you the option to keep the old behavior with a one-time settings change. So what's the problem exactly?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a great example of why I figured Google Maps for navigation. I don't use Maps to express my environmental values, I use it to get from A to B the fastest way. If they default to something else, they are actively getting in the way of why I would use their product. I have no interest in activist software.
Do you believe humans are causing climate change? If so, how do you envision it should be addressed that doesn't involve us changing our habits?
If addressing climate change relies on people changing habits against their selfish interests, then we are doomed.
The externality should be internalised with a carbon tax. It's the simple, most obvious solution and it will cause selfish interest and ethical choices to align when it comes to carbon emission.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Other purposes? It's easy! You can make people avoid businesses that didn't paid to you and make them drive close to fastfood that wanted advertising. Or you can drive people around some political protests...
I'm sorry, this is is dangerously close to conspiracy theory territory. I am by no means, an apologist for Google, but I seriously doubt they have the ability/resources, or even motivation to manage route planning at such a microscopic level. I recognize that they have been caught with their pants down with things like altering search results [1], but making broad speculative claims like this about the real world wit…