241–250 of 456 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's hilarious to see people in LA buying sports cars. Like even if you're willing to risk a speeding ticket you won't be able to drive faster than the traffic in front of you. Just a status symbol, I guess.
A sports car on the roads through the Malibu hills is very fun...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don’t know what you mean by “documented” but here is Georgia: Georgia isn't going to punish you for going the speed limit in the right lane, they passed that law recently and called it the 'slow poke law'. > On the other hand “in compliance with law” is it’s own barrel of monkeys because it doesn’t specify priority. It really isn't.
> Georgia isn't going to punish you for going the speed limit in the right lane, they passed that law recently and called it the 'slow poke law'. So you’re saying they had to pass a law clarifying a contradiction in previous laws? Those contradictions were my original point. And it still only applies to the slow poke lane. > It really isn't. Oh you sweet summer child.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Waymo continues to improve every year, but dumb drivers never will.
Weird, because per capita deaths leveled off in the 1930's and declined from that plateau in '70's to lows in the 2010's. Did we get less dumb drivers starting in the '70's?
Per-mile-driven deaths started climbing again around 2012 in the U.S., I'd wager due to the trend towards larger vehicles causing more collateral damage.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don’t know what you mean by “documented” but here is Georgia: Georgia isn't going to punish you for going the speed limit in the right lane, they passed that law recently and called it the 'slow poke law'. > On the other hand “in compliance with law” is it’s own barrel of monkeys because it doesn’t specify priority. It really isn't.
> Georgia isn't going to punish you for going the speed limit in the right lane, they passed that law recently and called it the 'slow poke law'. So you’re saying they had to pass a law clarifying a contradiction in previous laws? Those contradictions were my original point. And it still only applies to the slow poke lane. > It really isn't. Oh you sweet summer child.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don’t know what you mean by “documented” but here is Georgia: Georgia isn't going to punish you for going the speed limit in the right lane, they passed that law recently and called it the 'slow poke law'. > On the other hand “in compliance with law” is it’s own barrel of monkeys because it doesn’t specify priority. It really isn't.
> Georgia isn't going to punish you for going the speed limit in the right lane, they passed that law recently and called it the 'slow poke law'. So you’re saying they had to pass a law clarifying a contradiction in previous laws? Those contradictions were my original point. And it still only applies to the slow poke lane. > It really isn't. Oh you sweet summer child.
Are they fully self-contained or they need to talk back to internet during the ride?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Taxi companies didn't have any apps to leapfrog in the first place. Uber and Lyft created a superior product that people wanted. Doesn't matter whose fault it is, the buyers preferred something that was more convenient. There was never a situation where uneducated cabbies on shoestring budgets were going to be able to develop an Uber/Lyft alternative.
> Taxi companies didn't have any apps to leapfrog in the first place. This shows just how badly behind they were. All the large cab companies have had apps for years. No one knows about them. Here's YellowCab's: https://rideyellow.com/app/ > uneducated cabbies on shoestring budgets were going to be able to develop an Uber/Lyft alternative. Are you under the impression that most cabs are/ were independent? That wasn't…
In those days if you needed a car to take you someplace, aside from the outer boro examples, it was always faster to get a yellow cab. The car services could maybe get there in 45 minutes if you were lucky - big companies would often have deals with car service companies to have a few cars stationed at their buildings for peak times, so execs didn't have to wait for a car.
The yellow cab operators were essentially all independent - many rented their medallion/vehicle, either from a colleague or an agency, but they worked their own schedules and their own instincts on where to be picking up fares at given times.
No one expected something like uber - what is essentially a street hail masquerading as a livery cab. This basically destroyed yellow cabs and the traditional livery cab companies, but some of it is attributable to the VC spend, lowering prices (yellow cab fares are set by the city, livery cab fares are market-regulated) and incentivizing drivers. They made it so lucrative to drive an uber that you had thousands of new uber drivers on the road, or taxi drivers who stopped leasing their medallions and started driving uber.
At some point, though - the subsidies dried up, prices went up, and now its often faster to get a yellow cab than an uber/lyft. This is anecdata, but I take cabs a lot, and I've spoken with ~6 taxi drivers in the last year who either started with driving uber and shifted to driving a taxi, or went taxi-uber-taxi. Then I've had a lot more taxi drivers where they need passengers to put the destination into the driver's waze or google maps, even for simple things like intersections - I suspect they're uber drivers who became depedent on the in-app directions and native language interactions.
But the broader point I'm making is that in NYC, the drivers themselves were essentially unable to do anything about the changing market. The only power they had was to shift between the type of fares they were getting. And today when you order an uber, sometimes you get a yellow cab.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Georgia isn't going to punish you for going the speed limit in the right lane, they passed that law recently and called it the 'slow poke law'. So you’re saying they had to pass a law clarifying a contradiction in previous laws? Those contradictions were my original point. And it still only applies to the slow poke lane. > It really isn't. Oh you sweet summer child.
[flagged]
You’re literally viewing the law as a precise programming language, whereas I’m arguing that the reality is that laws are written in natural language that contains not only semantic ambiguity, but temporal ambiguity where one law is not coherent with another because they were created by different people at different times with different incentives.
You also didn’t bother responding to the meat of my argument, but hey you do you. Personally I’ve found that anyone who refers to other human beings as “NPCs” is void of any substance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I live in New York City: no. If everyone drove on the shoulder like a few assholes do, we just wouldn't have shoulders. This is extremely silly.
I don't drive on the shoulder as a way of getting around people. However, if I was behind someone who had gone all the way to the end of an exit lane but then was trying to cut back in to the regular flow of traffic, and I was in a car that wasn't willing to go around this person by driving on their shoulder to get around them as they tried to force their way in at the very last second, I would lose massive chunks of…
(Disclaimer: I used to live off the Tillary exit and this is a unique problem – one that's mostly caused by the same types of people who drive on the shoulders because they're so important!)