Safe Streets Rebel’s protest comes after automatic vehicles were blamed for incidents including crashing into a bus and running over a dog. City officials in June said…

  • Billiam@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    There’s a concern about more cameras recording all the time, and while I don’t personally buy that argument (because being out in public means you don’t have any expectation of privacy) I don’t agree with these companies storing that data to give to police, effectively making Waymo or Cruise into private arms of law enforcement.

    The reason that makes the most sense to me is it still encourages cities to be designed around cars, and not transit or people-oriented methods of travel. Even though they might make travel smoother by better decision-making than people, I’d still rather see more spaces devoted to foot traffic connected by buses or trains than the sprawl necessitated by personal vehicles.

    • nivenkos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I bet you own a car though.

      Cars are freedom. You can go anywhere, anytime, without worrying about a delayed schedule or how many connections you’d need to get exactly where you’re going.

      You can listen to your own music and carry as much as you like, without worrying about someone trying to steal it or altercations with the public.

      I agree we need electric cars, but anti-car policy is ultimately just trapping people in cities, allowing the rich to still enjoy their cars from commuter towns, etc. whilst the working class are stuck in overcrowded pod apartments. This is literally the reality in a lot of Spain, Sweden, etc. where you’re lucky to get even a 70m2 apartment and parking is extortionate.

      • CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean, not really. You can go with a car only where infrastructure (roads) has been built, same as transit. There’s more places reachable by that infrastructure, but that is only because things have been built around it. You absolutely do have to worry about delays; there are after all things like traffic jams and road closures. You have to worry about the route you take, not in the form of what connections to take but in the form of navigating the right route. People absolutely have to worry about things like theft and altercation when driving, else people wouldn’t lock their cars, and road rage wouldn’t exist.

        Personally, after having moved somewhere I can manage to at least live my life, without owning a car, I find it feels a lot more freeing to just be able to walk places I want to be, or get on a train that someone else is driving, than having to own some expensive machine that needs periodic and also costly maintenance, and then having to operate it constantly to get anywhere, with the risk of accidently killing someone if I make a mistake.

        • everythingsucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          You can go with a car only where infrastructure (roads) has been built

          I can drive a car from where I’m at right now to where you’re at right now. And I’m not even going to ask where you’re at. I think that’s pretty neat.

          But I do agree, walkability and reliable public transit are super nice. The time I’ve spent in smaller, remote ski towns where I could walk/bike or take a bus anywhere in a short amount of time are some of my favorite memories.

      • lp0101@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        cars are freedom

        What about my freedom to walk or bike? My freedom to be able to cross the street? My freedom to get milk without taking 2000 pounds of metal with me?

        Cars warp entire cities around them. In an ideal world, everyone would be able to own a car, but very few people would need to own a car

      • TanakaAsuka@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re ignoring the thing car drivers complain about the most, traffic delays. To me real freedom is being able to get to the places I need to using my own two feet, without needing to spend thousands every year on a car, insurance, etc. Headphones also exist and let you enjoy your own music while outside of a car without disturbing anyone!

        What we need everywhere is a people first policy that makes it so you don’t need a car to get around, especially in cities.

        I’m not sure what you are talking about with Spain. People there are not “trapped” in cities, they have good public transit in most cities and one of the best high speed rail systems in the world to get between cities, on top of that an extensive bus system that is even cheaper and extensive than the trains.

        • nivenkos@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          But in Spain there are not connections to most places outside cities, like most smaller towns don’t even have rail connections, nevermind going to the countryside and touristic places.

          Yeah, it’s okay between cities (although AVE is expensive), but that’s my point - it’s only cities.

          • TanakaAsuka@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            In Spain you can totally get the bus to most places, especially touristy places! AVE is expensive but there are budget high speed operators operating now and the bus is cheap. All these options are far cheaper than owning a car (and cheaper than owning a car in a car centric country as well!).

            Also those towns that don’t have good connections it’s mostly poor people living there, so rather than being stuck in cities because they don’t own cars, they’re stuck in poor rural towns because there is no transit to other places!

      • GFGJewbacca@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think the view behind the anti-car movement is that there shouldn’t be cars. Period. Doesn’t matter what income bracket. Gas powered cars create huge amounts of pollution, all cars generate lots of waste and are in general very inefficient modes of transportation.

        I believe in the end it advocates for busses and trains (above and below ground)as public transit. I think there’s also a belief that infrastructure is supposed to be updated to support this. Busses get their lane, while most of a street is for people moving under their own power, be it walking, cycling or using a wheelchair.

        • oce 🐆@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think the view behind the anti-car movement is that there shouldn’t be cars. Period.

          I don’t think so. Fuck-car people are rather against the omnipresence of private cars and how cities prioritize them instead of greener means of transportation, which creates mortal danger, pollution, wasted energy, wasted materials and wasted space. But I don’t think they would mind the occasional car for reasonable usage like disabled people, craftsmen, public services etc.