Live data from Hacker News

Let’s Build a Future Without Cars

pandodaily.com

81–90 of 146 posts

Re: Let’s Build a Future Without Cars

#81
I applaud the direction, but I do have one small nit to pick:

"there really hasn’t been much advance in car technology in the intervening 126 years"

You can drive all day every day for fifty years [1] and never use the biggest feature we've been researching for cars, but that doesn't mean it's any less of a breakthrough.

"Between 1970 and 2010, the number of fatalities decreased by 38% and the number of injury crashes by 13%. In the same period, the number of vehicles and the distance travelled more than doubled."

Many of those gains are due to the parade of safety technologies over the last several decades. Electronic stability control, airbags, crumple zones. If we go all the way back to Benz, then we should talk about seatbelts and shatter proof glass too.

Cars haven't exactly been stagnant, we've just had a subtler priority. Those safety advances will lay an important foundation, and hopefully be extended as we shoot for a "crash proof" personal flying vehicle.

[1] http://www.npr.org/2012/01/30/146075552/ups-driver-honored-f...

[2] http://www.internationaltransportforum.org/irtadpublic/pdf/1...

Re: Let’s Build a Future Without Cars

#82
post #13

Let's built a future with 300mph self-driving supercars and mach 20 spaceplanes -- addressing the actual desires and wants of most users (mobility, convenience) rather than imposing personal ethics of asceticism (mass transit, anti-urbanization). The author brings up a lot of valid problems with contemporary car travel (and notably none of its revolutionary advantages), but most of these orthogonal to the personal-vs…

Yes, I came in here to comment of this. Let's cure the ills of a device that is massively useful. Sure - cities should look more like NYC and less like Houston - I'll give the car haters that, but I'm with uvdiv, that I'd far prefer fast, clean versions that drove themselves. The great part of high-speed rail, etc. is that you can relax while they do the driving and you arrive close to your destination. However, driv…

Maybe I'm the one crazy luddite on HN (would not surprise me at all!), but I don't look forward to self-driving 300mph cars. The idea of trusting a computer system to keep me safe on open roads, in close proximity to other computer-controlled cars, sounds terrifying, not relaxing.

Yes, I love high-speed trains, because they're on a track, and while this obviously does not guarantee safety, it certainly makes it feel much safer to me.

Compare to air travel. Even with the meticulous maintenance and regulatory requirements, a significant fraction of the population is scared of flying (to some degree). Driverless cars are better in one aspect (operates at ground level), worse in others (proximity to other vehicles), just different in some ways (computer versus human pilot), and complete unknowns, so far, in others (regulation).

Even if the actual crash/injury/fatality rate of driverless cars is nil, how do you design a 300mph computer-controlled car to not be scary for passengers? I want it to work, as I recognize the advantages, but it seems like the social problems will be even tougher than the technical problems, and I'm definitely not going to be an early adopter.

Re: Let’s Build a Future Without Cars

#83
post #80

Cars are one of the worst inventions by human kind. Aside from the points mentioned in the article there is also many deaths by cars (traffic accidents) and the huge amount of cars now days tend to saturate the roads and make mobilization a really slow process. My solution would be to get rid of cars all together an use only electrical trains driven by few professionals who are less likely to cause accidents; with fi…

Before cars became commonplace, we used horses to help transport goods and people inside cities. Horses dump manure. A lot of it. Quoting from http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/our-economic-past-th... : "A horse will on average produce between 15 and 35 pounds of manure per day. Consequently, the streets of nineteenth-century cities were covered by horse manure. This in turn attracted huge numbers of flies, and…

[deleted]

Re: Let’s Build a Future Without Cars

#84
post #79
post #49

Problem 1: This article is a giant anti-car rant with a few points of rational debate baked in that might help public policy. It's no more objectively helpful than reading a spiel from BimmerForums or ClubWRX on why they love their 300hp sports cars and would never give them up to be herded in a big, crowded, smelly bus. Problem 2: Cars are currently the best solution to the problems we have. That's why they are #1 i…

> Cars are currently the best solution to the problems we have. That's why they are #1 in the US. Granted -- so long as you take the legislative and tax situation into account. That's part of the "problem" to which cars are currently the best solution for most people, but it's not unchangeable. Or from a different perspective, you could say: the "problem" is that people want to live in places (like suburbs) to which…

http://www.bts.gov/publications/federal_subsidies_to_passeng...

Roads definitely have subsidies, but according to the document above, much less than urban transit or rail - if people pay the full costs of cars, they should pay the full costs of transit (not your typical $1.50 bus fare). In urban areas like the Bay Area or LA County, car trips are about 80% of commute trips, with transit at 10-15% but local/state transit funding is WAY above 10-15%, with a lot of gas taxes being funneled to transit projects. I believe that first off, we are 'paying' the true costs of cars, as people have voted for a government that pays for highways through income income taxes as well as gas taxes.

You could argue the same way about incentives for public vs. private transportation - people get advantages for buying hybrid cars the same way the public transport is heavily pushed onto cities. I don't think the solution to suburbs is to make them all into cities, or that the solution to cars as they are today is to replace them with public transport - cars have succeeded in capturing a huge % of marketshare so we should learn from their success and improve private transportation rather than trying to change human nature.

Re: Let’s Build a Future Without Cars

#85

Given a safe, flat road you can't beat a bicycle for energy efficiency and cost: http://www.treehugger.com/bikes/whats-the-worlds-most-energy...

One of the main reasons for that is that it's an awful lot slower. I live about 40 miles from work at the moment, which I cover in about 50 minutes door-to-door; there is absolutely no way I could achieve that on a bike. I'd guess that might take me 3-4 hours each way, so hence the bike is unfortunately not an option, regardless of its energy efficiency or cost.

Re: Let’s Build a Future Without Cars

#86
post #40

To me, what would be interesting about a world without cars (or even with cars, but vastly more attractive public transport) is that it would partly reverse a sad isolationist trend that's come along with the power and control given to us by modern technology. I used to catch a bus every day through the city, and there were a lot of strange people on those trips. Gangs of 9 year old gangster kids drunk up the back. L…

You've done a great job of summing up one of the reasons that public transit in the US is as bad as it is.

My goal is to safely get from Point A to Point B, and I don't want to spend a lot of time waiting around at Point A, or sitting and waiting on the way to Point B.

We have three goals here, in order of importance. Let's call them safety, convenience, and speed.

Taking a bus with a bunch of drunken hooligans doesn't help much with that first, and most important, goal. I want my transportation to be safe, and the high crime rates on public transportation in the US speak for themselves.

Interesting experiences are great. Getting mugged isn't, and while I'm not a prime target (muggers don't usually pick on two-hundred-pound guys that spend a lot of time in the gym), five loud, drunk people in a gang is not the sort of situation I want to be around regularly.

Especially if I'm carrying a $1500 laptop and a $600 smartphone.

Convenience, at least here in SF, is also pretty miserable. I have not once had a bus arrive on-time. The trains are usually on-schedule, but conveniently frequent only during peak hours, and they only cover a small portion of the greater Bay Area. Don't even get me started on CalTrain.

If I want to meet somebody and I need to take a bus, I need to add an extra half-hour window around my journey. If you assume a normal tech-person salary, that lost half-hour makes it cheaper to take a taxi for most journeys.

Speed is good for trains; busses, on the other hand, live at the whim of traffic.

Japan gets all of these right in its major cities. I have never once felt threatened on a train, and delays are few and far between.

The tradeoff they make is in manpower -- station employees are everywhere. We tend to not like hiring lots of people in the US, and so public transit stations might have one or two visible employees, and certainly not visible, uniformed personnel at every platform.

This is why cars are as popular as they are. In SF, if I want to go from Pacific Heights to the Inner Sunset, a journey by bus-and-train pushes about an hour. By car, it's about fifteen minutes.

In my car, I have a stereo, air conditioning, and a clean, comfortable seat. Public transit, on the other hand, is pretty filthy here in SF, and for some odd reason they jack the heat up enough so that I need to do a little striptease whenever I get on a train.

All minor inconveniences, sure, but it adds up quickly, and what do I get in return? I'm late, have lost money in the long run, and arrive more often than not in a worse mood than when I started.

I really want working public transit here in the US, but the way things are going, I don't see that happening for at least another decade.

Re: Let’s Build a Future Without Cars

#87
The Accountant's Falacy: Anything for which the debit doesn't appear on your balance sheet is "free".

Follow busses in traffic for a while, and add up the total fuel, time wasted, etc. in all the traffic impeded by the less then 1/2 full (on average) bus. There is no branch of mathematics that could be used to argue that busses save the civilization money.

Consider if everyone was not disallowed by law(1) from carpooling for compensation. Roughly doubles the aggregate person-mile per hour bandwidth of the existing traffic system...

Bus driver unions and taxi owner associations are the net gainers of the lobbyist-written laws impeding transportation innovation; everyone else loses.

1) you can carpool all you want informally. You cannot set up publicly accessible systems which compete with taxis.

Re: Let’s Build a Future Without Cars

#88
post #86
post #40

To me, what would be interesting about a world without cars (or even with cars, but vastly more attractive public transport) is that it would partly reverse a sad isolationist trend that's come along with the power and control given to us by modern technology. I used to catch a bus every day through the city, and there were a lot of strange people on those trips. Gangs of 9 year old gangster kids drunk up the back. L…

You've done a great job of summing up one of the reasons that public transit in the US is as bad as it is. My goal is to safely get from Point A to Point B, and I don't want to spend a lot of time waiting around at Point A, or sitting and waiting on the way to Point B. We have three goals here, in order of importance. Let's call them safety, convenience, and speed. Taking a bus with a bunch of drunken hooligans doesn…

[deleted]

Re: Let’s Build a Future Without Cars

#89
post #40

To me, what would be interesting about a world without cars (or even with cars, but vastly more attractive public transport) is that it would partly reverse a sad isolationist trend that's come along with the power and control given to us by modern technology. I used to catch a bus every day through the city, and there were a lot of strange people on those trips. Gangs of 9 year old gangster kids drunk up the back. L…

"Civilization is the progress toward a society of privacy. The savage's whole existence is public, ruled by the laws of his tribe. Civilization is the process of setting man free from men." --Ayn Rand

Re: Let’s Build a Future Without Cars

#90
post #40

To me, what would be interesting about a world without cars (or even with cars, but vastly more attractive public transport) is that it would partly reverse a sad isolationist trend that's come along with the power and control given to us by modern technology. I used to catch a bus every day through the city, and there were a lot of strange people on those trips. Gangs of 9 year old gangster kids drunk up the back. L…

Man has traditionally (going back 10 thousands of years) not had the type of interaction that you mention. Civilization brought man close together in this modern era. Tract housing, public transportation, ETC. History shows us that is more in mans nature to be largely isolated except for a small group of people. Even when living amongst other people - traditionally people were much more spread out than now and did not interact with those outside of their small group very often

It is clear that man prefers to travel with privacy or cars would never have succeeded where alternatives exist. The convenience factor is huge too.

I prefer the freedom to go wherever, whenever and without some crazy person screaming at me on some bus or subway somewhere.

Post reply on HN