This isn’t a great argument. There is so much open undeveloped space in the US that could be used to house people. This interchange isn’t taking space away from anyone. There are lots of good reasons to reduce cars, but this isn’t one of them.
That’s not really true here though. This is in the middle of an urban area, not in some big open empty space that’s unoccupied, like Montana, or North Dakota. This is in the middle of Houston, Texas, a very populous city.
Calling anywhere in Greater Houston “the middle of an urban area” is just incorrect. It’s the 4th most populated city in the US and the 150th most densely populated. There are a lot of people in Houston but also just a fucking Tom of Houston around. But, as is the norm in this magazine, you are all free to ignore facts and data so you can raise a furor in your tiny anti-car cult.
Houston is so big because the city has absorbed all the communities around it. It’s incredibly sprawled so the density is much lower than cities of comparable population. This creates all sorts of other issues, like the problem of paving over hundreds of square miles of wetland.
Why do you think it’s so sparsely populated? What’s keeping people so far from each other? Is it just Houstonians are their own species and can’t stand to be in areas over a certain population density?
Because humans enjoy having lots of space to live in. Personally I would never go back to living in an apartment since I can afford a house and land. I’ve lived in small apartments, big apartments, a single-wide trailer, large houses, small houses, and medium houses. Medium house with acreage of land is the best living situation of all for me.
I concur bro. These bullshitters are high on their own farts and apparently can’t see the truth that they are never going to change the vast landscape of America into their imaginary Soviet-style shithole idea of a “utopia” where people don’t drive and live in tiny boxes in human hives.
Soviet Union was bad for multiple reasons but in major cities the housing was not really any worse than anywhere else in the world. I guess you just enjoy spending 3 hours a day in your car.
I don’t commute to work often, but when I do it’s only about a 20 minute drive in light traffic. I certainly wouldn’t spend 3 hours a day in a car to commute to work when there are plenty of jobs within that 20 minute commute from my house.
The point was that in total you probably spend more time in your car than any sane average European would, because you lack options. And because you lack options it’s a hellscape for anyone who can’t drive a car. The point wasn’t your commute, because your commute probably doesn’t represent the median. Also good for you. My commute is also irrelevant, but it’s five minutes walk to a train, ten minutes by train and five minutes walk from the train to the office, all that in an environment where I don’t fear for my life, the noise level permits me to whisper to other people without them having difficulties hearing me.
This is the keyword for such a city. It should've gotten such a system already by now when reaching the first million. All these arab/middle eastern cities seem so extremely focused on car infrastructure to a rather disturbing degree. And all the carbrains I know think these cities are the pinacle of modern city development: all just gigantic glass skyscrapers and highways circling around them - nothing else.
Also, back on Facebook/Instagram, there's not a single person who had the money to visit Dubai once and post pictures from there (at least that I'm aware of), that is not car brained. I'm sure they all use their car everywhere and nothing less, they could even be doing their basic shopping from the corner store with it, I think.
All these arab/middle eastern cities seem so extremely focused on car infrastructure to a rather disturbing degree.
Not all cities, but I do understand your sentiment and it is echoed by many locally. Luckily the people in the top are aware they need to fix this. Though even if they ever did, who wants to walk when its 37C at night? Some cities have installed outdoor cooling.
One interesting concept is “the line” city, basically one ultra long building. No need for cars and you can travel from one end to the other via high speed metro. It’s basically a city optimized for public transport and so that everyone’s apartment has a beautifu view on unspoiled nature (well desert in this case haha)
I think a major reason for these models is that the more that the car becomes a computing device, the more that it’ll require regular patches and optimizations. Being connected to the servers and using services that route through it lets them gather usage data, offer some extra features that can functiom from anywhere, and update security and functionality (which would possibly involve full time developers I suppose).
It does seem greedy (way overpriced), but this isn’t the same as disabling hardware that you need to sub to activate (a la seat warmers). Plus it’s all still pretty cutting edge tech atm and I usually tell people that means you’re choosing to fund its early development (and being a beta tester) over using more standard and tested products.
Outside of self driving cars there isn’t a reason cars should become a computing device though.
If you want to end a car centric infrastructure in favor of bikes or velomobiles you would still want self driving cars that you only use for special tasks. Robotaxies or robo busses. Then it makes sense to not own a car.
You know how Belgium does this? Designate the entire length of the road as “bike priority street”, which means 30km/h max and no passing the bikes. Doesn’t require a scrap of extra planning, construction or what have you.
Sure, you put the bikers at the mercy of the drivers, but hey, gotta know what to sacrifice.
The Netherlands also does this. They create ‘Bicycle streets’ or ‘fietsstraten’ where drivers have to give priority to and aren’t allowed to pass cyclists. Way better than this and doesn’t require too much construction in principle.
There is plenty of subscription or always online software out there that is cracked and fully working, Adobe products, Microsoft office, Spotify, etc.
Obviously any service that can’t be replaced with a free or open source alternative won’t work, first thing I think that would be on the chopping block would be anything that uses GPS, though that’s just a guess, I don’t really have intimate knowledge of this
And potentially family. It’s a 4 door truck. It’s a transportation vehicle with a bed and slightly greater towing capacity than a sedan. Lot of suburban dads have these.
I’m a tiny-truck-lover, and want one badly, but my family’s big 'murica truck is waaaay more comfortable than my current sedan :( Unrelated, but do tiny work trucks come with Bluetooth now?
Damn I hated riding in the back of my dad’s Silverado. I’m almost 6ft and I can comfortably fit behind myself in the back seat of my impreza. The new Maverick looks like a pretty cool small truck option
Typical “Everyone drives a big truck so I will too!” mindset that misses the core issue on why kei trucks are the better ones. You simply can’t imagine a world where the Ford Death Cruiser 4 billion doesn’t exist.
Japan, the country that invented kei cars, also has larger cars. You’re not looking at the same chance as running into a hummer, but crashing a kei car into a white plate out here still doesn’t look good for the kei.
Sure, but they’re not banned from highways. It’s not uncommon to see them, although you’re right about lower speed limits-- a lot of highways are about 80 km max
Better to get the one that’s specifically designed to kill toddlers then. If children have to die so you can be less scared of a “mash up” then it’s all worth it.
Not sure if you’re serious but i will answer as if you were.
A common attack against people with large trucks is that they have a large truck to compensate having a small penis. This implies having a small penis is bad/unacceptable. This is obvious body shaming but also contributes to toxic masculinity.
Both of these are unacceptable.
There are many alternative ways to talk shit without playing into these kinds of comments and TBH, the compensation comments have been used so much and are so obviously baseless that they don’t hit very hard, IMO.
well, i didn’t actually say that, and i’m not responsible for others filling in the blanks with their own negative thoughts. as you can see, several others actually managed to conclude something different.
don’t blame the Rorschach test because you see something you don’t like.
you’re projecting your own insecurities onto me and making yourself angry over something you imagined. I a not to blame for things your imagination does.
work out your problems with a professional, not by attacking random internet strangers.
The facts? What are you referring to? I am simply asking a question about percentages. Are you imagining that my question was somehow related to an earlier post?
If you’re so lost that you can’t even maintain the thread of the conversation, I suggest you review the past comments to find your place. As for imaginings, you’re the only one who, as I just mentioned, can’t seem to keep track of the things anyone is saying here, making things up as you go along.
I’m glad we are both in complete agreement that it is definitely impossible for any meaning to be conveyed other than a literal interpretation of the exact words being used.
Your contribution to this discussion has been very valuable and I’m sure everyone is looking forward to hearing more from you
I never said that, but that’s never stopped you from pretending I did, or imagining any other contribution. Why bother for me to participate at all when you’re clearly capable of carrying on both of our parts by yourself?
Listen, you said what you said. Own up to it and learn, or don’t and move on. But you really don’t have to sit there and dig yourself even more into the shit. You sound silly.
Neither is trashing the climate with pointlessly big vehicles just to compensate for whatever insecurities they have. We need to either tax or regulate these stupid vehicles back to a reasonable and safe size.
It’s not just big vehicles that do that. For instance I wouldn’t call a supra a big vehicle but when they wake me up at 3 AM because they have to be louder than fire sirens I feel like that is compensating as well.
In this case it’s not about body shaming but about shaming a means of compensation. Also it’s not really a literal take. “Big dick energy” has nothing do with actual dick size. And being a “Karen” has nothing to with a persons actual name or gender.
It’s penis. He means penis. Like, probably the length and girth of his penis. No one ever mentions penis color or how hairy it is (those are Jeep guys), just always the size.
Sigh. Look, if you’ve never been to a jeep consortium, that’s just how it goes. Hairy things flopping all over, kindof like a rave with more roll bars. I never want to see that much pubic hair again in my life.
I eent to buy a jeep last year and the dealer said he had to inspect my shaft and pubes before he’d let me on the lot. Didn’t wind up buying one, the market adjustments were outrageous!
A couple of people that drive massive vehicles they don’t need like Escalades have told me (former practicing psychologist) over the years that they know they are bad drivers, but they want to drive a tank so they can walk away from whatever accidents they know they’ll cause.
Because practicing and improving their driving skills is apparently not on the table. The lack of empathy is unsettling. They don’t care who they kill, they just don’t want to be inconvenienced.
I think this shows some of the bigger issues in car centric design. Even if you don’t like driving, aren’t good at it, or aren’t comfortable with it, you often have to do it anyway beceause there are no viable alternatives.
When a certain popular president and congress passed the bail-out of the domestic vehicle industry, written by the same in 2008 that allowed such vehicles to be more profitable then a smaller cars, he was awarded a noble prize and reelected in a landslide.
Gotta have more real estate for factory lights… Starting to see trucks with eight lights on the front going down down the road.
The ironic part is that the high beams usually disable all the aux lights, so if you see a newer truck with only two lights, it’s probably got the high beams on, and if they turn it back to low beams to be “courteous”, it turns on all the others and ends up being worse than if they’d just left the fucking high beams on.
I don’t really give a shit about the penile compensation aspect of “muh bigguh truck”, but fuck your wall of lights…
Man, I drive a truck, 500 a month, will be paid off in less than 2 years, I get a lot of utility out of it and I got it from my brother who put some nice tires on it
But I also hate it because it’s so fuckin big, and I hate that people might think I’m a truck freak, but it’s just my only good option right now
I got a little jeep renegade that runs me like 350 a month…
First time I put gas in it and realized it had a 12 gallon tank, I was all like “OMG, why?!?”. Then I drove 300 miles before the light came on and It made perfect sense :)
Full tank doesn’t even get halfway to the $100 mark where you gotta reset the pump to fill it the rest of the way, ya know?
500 a month could treat you a lot better at the gas pump.
These are things that need a subscription, though… These are remote features that require internet connectivity and application serving. Things that don’t just come with a one-time fee. These are actual services being provided by Kia or Hyundai. This isn’t the same as putting a hardware feature of your car behind an arbitrary pay wall.
yeah, i agree. it costs them money so there’s little to no incentive to run that stuff for free.
also the price is reasonable (about as much as a single Nano ec2 instance on aws + mobile plan that’s required to connect the car to the internet) and pretty much negligible when compared to amount of money you’ll be spending on that vehicle anyway.
then there are privacy concerns tho. do you trust kia with knowledge of your exact car location, 24/7? (I’d assume it doesn’t connect to their servers without the subscription?)
also that information (Exact location of all kia vehicles, with exact model numbers and registration information) seems like a goldmine for car thieves if leaked (or accessed by a third party.)
also, fuck heated seat other hardware/local software subscriptions
Make the car cost £400 more, once, when it’s bought first hand. That will cover any costs for the lifetime of the vehicle. There you go, chuck the subscription in the sea.
I see your point but the costs to most if not all of what they offer are minimal… And for sure most of that could be a single payment when buying the car, calculated an estimated usage during the estimated life of the car, they could just be part of the price of the car not even indicated.
Features like this really do require a subscription model. This isn’t enabling remote start by pressing a key on your fob. This is sending a request to a server, which connects to a cell tower to broadcast signal saying “turn on this car”. That stuff ain’t free. Someone has to pay AT&T for the data connection.
What BMW was (is?) doing is abhorrent. You’re buying a car with heated seats, and you have to subscribe to hit the button.
Sure, you need to pay for the connection, whether wifi for cell. There’s no need for specific servers or computation to take place. Yeah, you’ll need to pay for another (low data usage) phone line probably, but that should be it.
Then let me have the remote start that has existed for decades as ONE option (without a monthly subscription), and the remote start that requires an entire infrastructure that isn’t required for me to look out my window and remote start my car as an option for those who want or need it.
That’s Kia - I thought we were speaking more broadly. We drive a Toyota product and were offered nothing but the app. However, to your point that may have been poor salesmanship.
Features like this really do require a subscription model. This isn’t enabling remote start by pressing a key on your fob. This is sending a request to a server, which connects to a cell tower to broadcast signal saying “turn on this car”. That stuff ain’t free. Someone has to pay AT&T for the data connection.
Only because they unethically intentionally designed it that way, when they could’ve just as easily picked a different design that could’ve worked entirely locally. They are inventing excuses for rentiership.
As they pointed out in your original post, it’s not, “the subscription model…for something that you already paid & own.” This isn’t subscription seat warmers, it’s paying for an additional service outside the car. You can argue it’s too expensive, but without their internet connection and servers, these features wouldn’t be possible.
Remote start has been around for well over a decade and did not require internet or a subscription. If you just subscribe and use the feature then clearly the neccesary equipment for remote start is already installed and you paid for that equipment regardless if you use the subscription service.
There’s no need to host servers for 99% (maybe 100%) of this stuff. All the remote start features can be done through a direct connection between your phone and car. There’s no need for a third computer to be involved, except to check if you’ve paid for it. As long as your car has wifi access (or phone network access, which would need to be paid for) then it can communicate with other devices on the network/internet. Sure, you still have to pay for the internet, but that’s paid to the ISP, not the car company.
I’m not sure which direct connection you’re thinking of, but for most phones that would be limited to WiFi (probably WiFi Direct), Bluetooth, and maybe NFC. NFC range is tiny and Bluetooth’s is pretty small. WiFi’s range is approximately the same thing as an RF remote, which isn’t great.
Also, if we did have direct connection (which would be great for confirming the start worked, and the status of the car), why would we need internet??
By direct I meant routing to the car and user device, not through company servers. There’s no need for that. Both devices are computers. The only reason the company would need it routed through them first is to make sure you’ve paid up.
Yes, I mentioned that. However, the cell plan would be a lot cheaper. There shouldn’t be a lot of data coming through.
It would mean exposing it as much as any other device is exposed. It’d have a port open and listening for communication. Honestly, I’m pretty sure it’d be identical to how it is currently. It’s not like sending the communication from the company server is any different than from any other device. Its not connecting directly to the company’s servers. It’s a wireless service. Sure, it needs security measures, but it already needs that.
IMHO, It makes sense though. Piracy and open source are two approaches to attacking the enclosure of public (intellectual) space. Roads for cars are literally an enclosure of public space. The subscription model just extends from this logic.
Edit: These are also things that make sense because the car has to have cell service via a provider.
you’re paying for a backend service and a constant internet connection for your car here though, not for some client side feature that can be easily unlocked
they still have to pay for the backend infrastructure
my point is that this is not a client side feature, so it can’t be unlocked by some cpu vulnerability. This is a case in which a subscription service DOES make sense
In the end we are in cat & mouse situation
Vulnerability found > hacker cracked it > car company figure it out > vulnerability get patched
It’s same issues with John Deere tractor, from what i heard many farmer hire bunch of hacker to crack the software
“All Chicagoans have the right to public transit.” Sane and doable. Not done, not currently, as any map of the city will show you, but both possible and desirable.
“All Illinoisans have a right to public transit.” I’d love to see it, even if it’s just once-a-day trains to Springfield, to St. Louis, to the Region, to Milwaukee, to Rockford, to Peoria, to Chambana. But that’s a lot more train lines than we have now, and that means land for stations and RoWs, it means manpower and materials for maintenance, it means working out the logistics of scheduling and fare pricing for the communities being served. And it still won’t cover everyone unless augmented with bus lines, which also need logistics, manpower, and maintenance. Still desirable; not very efficient, especially for a perpetually cash-strapped state like Illinois.
“All Americans have a right to public transit.” At that point it’d be empty words, doing more harm than good.
“All humans have a right to public transit.” At this point, purely aspirational rather than descriptive.
In Switzerland, minimum frequency standards for public transport are enshrined in law – meaning each citizen can expect regular provision of bus and train services, even in rural areas. It is administrated at local level, with each of the country’s ‘cantons’ setting out a framework for delivery.
In the Zurich canton, for instance, which is roughly comparable with South Yorkshire, England, and includes both urban and rural areas, villages of 300 people or more are guaranteed a bus service at least every hour. In the Bern canton, which is less densely populated than Devon, small villages get at least four and up to 15 return bus services each day.
In both places, schedules are aligned with railway timetables to ensure citizens can travel short or long distances with ease. Accessibility for disabled passengers is also a legal requirement.
The article is speaking from a British perspective, so that isn’t really a problem. I do think that such a limit on density or some other metric. It should be more that every town and village has a public transport connection, rather than every rural farmhouse.
The “we” would be everyone who is not the “37 per cent of urban areas globally, and just 52 per cent of the urban population, [who] have convenient access to public transport.”
fuck_cars
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.