top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 3 points 3 years ago

my area doesnt even have sidewalks

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago

    Because to them, 'car' and 'vehicle' mean the same thing.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago* (5 children)

    I find these discussions seem to be dominated by young urbanites. People who don't need a car to get around as opposed to the huge number of people who live in areas that require a car to function. They are also physically able to bike many miles every day in any weather.

    I took public transportation when I lived in a big city and was glad to have it but anytime I needed to go beyond a limited area in the city I needed a car. Now I live in an area with very limited public transportation and very very little is in walking distance and biking for my needs is not an alternative. Frequently using 100% public transportation routes would increase your travel time by a large amount, time you may not have or want to sacrifice. If you live in country like France it seems like the transit unions have a stranglehold on the nation as they can shut down everyone at will, if you have a car you at least have an alternative. There are also breakdown issues, maintenance shutdowns, etc. You also run into the last mile issue a lot. Where you need to go is frequently not a reasonable distance from the stop. I usually needed a car to get to the train stations for instance.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    huge number of people who live in areas that require a car to function

    That is exactly the problem. Areas that require a car to function shouldn't exist. That's what those "young urbanites" are arguing for.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago

    And there are a lot of great point there about mixed zoning, but nuance is important. Should small towns with nearly nothing available locally, where you have to travel outside of town for most things just not exist? Even if they do have train connections (as they often do where I live, in Europe), you usually only have one train every 1-2 hours unless there's some specific significance to your town.

    Improving things is a nice goal, but it often feels like here that people just want to eliminate anything that doesn't conform to their ideals of how the world should be like.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    yeah I think its aimed to help fix the high traffic areas, for me when I was able to take the train from near my home to near my work it was amazing, it went pretty much parallel to the highways so you could drive and maybe get there a little faster but riding the train made it so you had time to play game boy or read a book instead of staring at the bumper in front of you in traffic. more trains and public transportation for commuting and cars for leisure like going on a road trip to go camping

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    All we honestly need is a few community shared self driving cars in each neighborhood to fix the last mile issue with mass transit, but the fuck cars absolutists often would rather have trains built to every houses doorstep than admit cars could still hold a purpose.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 1 point 3 years ago*

    Autonomous vehicles work better on rails. Also without having to deal with pedestrians.

  • source
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Because a train isn't going to drive me from home to anywhere that's not a train station.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago

    You've got legs, and if you can afford a few hundred dollars you've got wheels. By all rights, anywhere you need to go ought to be walking distance from a train station. The reason it's not anymore, is that Americans demolished their cities to build parking, and now everything's too far away.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Just an add here ... Pedestrian fatalities are up, largely due to huge vehicles in general. But EVs tend to be very heavy because of the batteries. So collisions tend to be very unpleasant.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago* (1 child)

    Can confirm. Rode a 1000w electric bike to work every day and couldn't wait to get a car after all the near-misses I had. It's even more dangerous than a pedal bike cause no one expects a bicycle to be going almost 30 MPH. Almost got hit at least 3-4 time from people turning right cause they didn't expect me to be inside the intersection so soon.

    They're a lot of fun for recreation but not as a daily driver, unless you have a suicide wish.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago* (1 child)

    It's almost as of going 50kph with a bicycle isnt a good idea to begin with

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    It sounds like the only reason they're dangerous in this case is that cars are on the road. Since cars are unethical and should be banned, I don't see why electric bikes would be any problem in a sensible society.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago* (3 children)

    No, e-bikes with these specs are considered vehicles just like motorcycles (in the EU) and need to follow the same rules.

    For example, you can't overtake people on the right, because it's stupid and dangerous (and illegal). And assuming the other guy meant he almost had near-misses while riding on the bike path - e-bike hauling ass at 30MPH has no place on any bike path, it's dangerous for everyone around.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago (6 children)

    What is the advantage of autonomous trains over regular? It seems to me that when driving a train is your job, the autonomy just takes it away.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments (6 replies)
    [–] 0 points 3 years ago (5 children)

    For me it's because I want an electric car and don't really care about other modes of transit. I don't want to be in a dense city, and a car is far more practical outside of one.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 0 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Bicycles are one of the most energy-efficient ways to travel, and electric ones even more so. But absolutely no one refers to them as "vehicles"...

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    As the other people mentioned. In North America, the percentage of urban populations is 85%, Latin America 81%, Europe 75%

    Yes, rural areas are probably in need of private vehicles, but not everyone out of those 85-75% of people need a car. We've become too reliant on them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Those stats are a bit misleading. For example, I live in a "urban" environnement, aka a town, but the closest anything is still 15km away.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    What is an anything in your mind

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    So nobody lived on that mountain before cars were invented?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)
  • [–] -1 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    They should return to premodern life if it's the only way to avoid climate collapse and the end of human civilization. Going back to the industrial age is better than being sent back to the stone age.

    Fortunately, we don't have to do either, because there are safe, clean, modern solutions to transit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago* (2 children)

    Let it be known that I do not want to attack you personally. But the notion of electric bikes being death traps is something I can't take seriously. I could go outside right now and film the street for an hour and watch 50% of bikes going by being electric, not to mention that you'd be hard pressed to find anyone wearing a helmet or protective gear.

    Electric bikes here are generally limited to 25kmh (15mph) and the electric motor will stop the moment you go over that speed. Besides, most people generally don't reach that speed because the largest users of electric bikes here are the over 50.

    In my personal experience the problem isn't so much the vehicle as the infrastructure being made for it. For context I live in the Netherlands in a smaller city (far from Amsterdam).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›