9 ms·

Going faster doesn’t make you happier; you just drive farther

104 points by oftenwrong 10y ago

StClaire 10y ago
There's a metaphor for life in there somewhere
- dredmorbius 10y ago
  One trip in which it's the journey, not the destination.
bbitmaster 10y ago
I disagree with the premise. Happiness with a transportation system does not correlate with the absolute speed you can go. Instead, I think it would correlate with "how many interesting/useful places can I reach with x effort". Most of the regions listed with fast transportation have things spread out much more. If the grocery store is a mile away, and it takes 5 minutes to drive there it is equivalent to being a couple of blocks away and it taking 5 minutes to walk there. (This assumes walking and driving are equally as easy). Or likewise if I had to commute to work every day by car for 1 hour, it doesn't matter how fast the car moves. I lost 1 hour of my time and that hour is traded for transportation happiness. I would argue that the faster regions have things spread out so far that it doesn't make up for the faster travel. I lived in both the Southern U.S. and now in San Francisco and I easily see this as being true. Travel by car in the south is MUCH faster than in SF, but it doesn't make up for way things are spread out.
- akgerber 10y ago
  That is the premise, and you agree with it? "We have a strong hunch as to why traveling faster might not generate more satisfaction with the transportation system. Faster travel is often correlated with lower density, and longer travel distances to common destinations, such as workplaces, schools and stores."
  - wtetzner 10y ago
    I think the real issue is that it seems pretty obvious that people don't drive fast because it makes them happy to go fast. People drive fast because if they don't, it takes them longer to get where they're going. Also, there's another reason I think people like to go fast. If you're stuck behind someone that's going slower than you've been going, you feel trapped and frustrated. It seems like this happens even if the person in front of you is only going a few MPH slower than you were.
exabrial 10y ago
I disagree. I'm much happier on my R1. I get to 75mph much quicker too :D
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- nf05papsjfVbc 10y ago
  Unfortunately, not everyone can ride a motorcycle or lives where the other motorists are friendly (or at least not-hostile) to motorcyclists. Many also consider it beyond their tolerance for risk. I am really lucky to live where people are happy to accommodate motorcycles (cars make room for motorcycles to split lanes when we have slow moving traffic) and I use one to commute to work everyday. I do sincerely wish more people could share in the joy of riding a motorcycle :-) However, I am aware that there are places where people are hostile to motorcycles. I just hope that some day things get better.
  - louhike 10y ago
    The noise of motorcycles is a problem when you live in cities. I'm afraid most city-dwellers would not be faborable of more motorcycle-friendly cities because of that.
    - mattthebaker 10y ago
      Not all motorcycles are that loud, especially the smaller ones more suitable for getting around IN the city. In proper urban areas, scooters are more convenient anyway -- smaller, more maneuverable, automatic transmissions, and more storage.
    - Arizhel 10y ago
      What's bad is that there's no reason for motorcycles to be loud, with current technology. Car engines these days are whisper-quiet; the exact same could be done with motorcycles. But most motorcyclists (in the US) insist on being obnoxiously loud. I'll bet Italian scooters aren't like this though.
mc32 10y ago
I don't know. I've been on slow systems (SJ VTA, for example) and they are irksome. Also bus lines in SF which take circuitous routes to get you somewhere --they are very frustrating and are reasons I've driven instead of ridden public transit many an occasion. The most frustrating part is you feel like you have no control over the situation. You know you are at the whim of the system and there is no wishing for skipping a stop or overtaking a slow motorist or cyclist.
- monster_group 10y ago
  I took the bus to work for several years. And I totally get what you are saying about not having control and getting frustrated. But to me the whole point of taking the public transport is to not have to worry about those things in the first place. Don't look at the traffic or how the driver is driving. Read a book, listen to an audio book, learn a new language, put on noise canceling head phones and do meditation - don't worry about how the traffic is or if the bus driver is slow. I did my entire Master's degree on the bus. Two hours of study time every day! After I got done with my Master's I studied tensor calculus on the bus because I wanted to understand general relativity. Nobody to disturb - no kids, no spouse. I don't take the bus anymore because I changed jobs and there is no public transportation available to the new destination. But I would happily take it again if there was one. Also walking to and from the bus/train stop is some physical exercise that otherwise I would not get.
  - closeparen 10y ago
    I wish I could do all those things while standing. I do have to look at how the driver is driving to anticipate jerky movements if I want to keep my balance.
- akgerber 10y ago
  That's because the SJ VTA is a terribly-designed transit system trying to traverse a region built almost entirely built around automobile travel as opposed to walking :)
closeparen 10y ago
This would seem to contradict the finding that lower commute times are associated with overall happiness [0, not the best link but there are many]. Slowing down a metro area by, say, forcing a modal shift towards bicycles will not make conveniently located housing any cheaper. If anything, it'll be more desirable and therefore more expensive. Absent a change in housing spend, commute times will rise and free time will sink. EDIT: I'll add that while I don't live far from work for a bigger yard, I do live far from work so I can have my own apartment, instead of roommates. Having lived both with roommates and without, I'm confident I really am happier this way. [0] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kirsten-dirksen/happiness-research-ranks-_b_829591.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kirsten-dirksen/happiness-rese...
- bbarn 10y ago
  No metro area is slowed down by bicycles. The longest a commute can be practical by bicycle (by practical I mean for the average, street/work clothes wearing person riding nearly every day) is under ten miles. You're still in the heavily congested car travel radius of any metro at that distance anyway, and bicycle traffic does not impede motor traffic what so ever.
  - closeparen 10y ago
    Bicycles don't slow drivers down. Removal of parking infrastructure, with the intention of getting people to switch from cars to bicycles, slows people down. I have a 6 mile/10 minute freeway haul to the last suburban train station on the way to work, then 20 minutes on the train. They've announced a plan to demolish the parking lot at that station and build offices, with the intention that people like me switch to bicycles. There are good reasons to do this, but I think it's absurd to suggest that we'll be equally happy with ~40 minutes added to our daily roundtrip. There are some good arguments. BART will make money from those offices, meaning it needs to ask for less from the taxpayer. There will be fewer traffic accidents near the station, and less polluted air (though the real air pollution problem there is urine). I merely argue that the happiness of the reluctant bicyclists isn't one of them.
    - 10y ago
dbg31415 10y ago
Speak for yourself. When I'm out on the road, top down, if I'm going over 70 I can drive for days. Ideally light traffic, roads with curves, and clear bright visibility. Figuring out how to pass the car in front of me is a puzzle that gives satisfaction when accomplished. Cut my speed down to under 35 in heavy traffic where I just have to trudge along with everyone else, where I have to shift between low gears a lot, or where I'm staring at headlights... man it just isn't fun. (Side note, what's with all the super bright headlights in the last 2-3 years? I see about 20% of new cars with these ridiculously bright lights that just shred my eyes at night -- is it a change in the law or a change in the tech that's allowing these to become so prevalent? Feels like these people are driving cars with their high-beams on... and I can't help but think that the drivers are assholes for doing it.)
- saurik 10y ago
  I really want to make a giant LED sign to put in my rear view window that says "adjust your headlights: they are blinding me :/" with a switch I can use to turn it on :(.
  - r00fus 10y ago
    Just make it out of LEDs bright enough to get the point across.
  - mantas 10y ago
    Auto-dimming rear view mirrors are awesome. There're aftermarket options too. They're not cheap but may be worth it if you spend a lot of time driving in the dark in heavy traffic.
    - GrinningFool 10y ago
      I can't stand my autodim mirror. It is always dimming too much and/or at the wrong time.
      - cardiffspaceman 10y ago
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
plaguuuuuu 10y ago
Seems a bit interesting to just ignore the whole s=d/t relationship and go for the 2D graphs. Adding the extra variable and doing some nice 3D charts can only create more meaningful data and conclusions.
barrkel 10y ago
Transport speed increases the feasible size of a city. That size could be to fit more people in, or it could be bigger houses, or whatever; but it effectively creates room for some form of growth, just like a big tree needs a thick trunk.
- mantas 10y ago
  This. My city is currently in sprawling mode (thanks to commie blocks occupying good spots). Most of the new development happens along the major highways. New quality roads increase development in said direction a lot.
sametmax 10y ago
Speed alone is a useless factor if you don't take in consideration the conditions of the drive. Taking hours in a comfortable train, with my laptop, a power socket and 4G is not the same as in the sub suck standing between to a fat sweating smelling dude and a crying baby. It's not the same if I have an appointment or if I'm going to my holiday. It's not the same if it's cold and raining or sunny with birds singing. People don't just go fast for the sake of speed. It has a purpose. So yeah, slowing down in life is a good advice. Chew and taste the food, exercice, take the time to read, stop to talk to your kids, etc. But all lifes happen in a context. The context is not the same when you have a shitty underpaid job with heavy commute in terrible conditions and 2 kids to drive to school, or, if you are like me, in the sunny south of france driving your cool-ass motorbike. Yeah I take my time, there. But I guaranty you, when I'm in the US traffic, I really don't want to take my time.
jlebrech 10y ago
it's depends how loud the engine is and if it's supposed to make that noise.
pif 10y ago
> We have a strong hunch as to why traveling faster might not generate more satisfaction with the transportation system. Faster travel is often correlated with lower density, and longer travel distances to common destinations, Indeed, who ever thought that speed alone could matter? Time is the key. 2 km at 30 km/h is much better than 60 km at 120 km/h.
threepipeproblm 10y ago
Ivan Illich told us this in the 70's, in "Energy and Equity" http://www.preservenet.com/theory/Illich/EnergyEquity/Energy%20and%20Equity.htm http://www.preservenet.com/theory/Illich/EnergyEquity/Energy...
- ashark 10y ago
  Thanks for this link. Not done yet, but it's outstanding so far.
binarymax 10y ago
See that blip for Rochester,NY with the top satisfaction and a high speed index? That's where I live and I can say it's the best driving city I've ever experienced. An excellent balance of bandwidth and saturation and average distance, makes most drivers here really easy going and happy. ...unless your trying to get to East Ave Wegmans at 5:30 pm on a Friday :)
- eternalban 10y ago
  A game I used to play back in the day when I had to drive on the interstates was to maintain sufficient distance to the car in front of me so that anyone could trivially make lane changes, etc. The amazing side effect was that typically the cars behind me would start doing the same thing. It was mildly pleasurable.
  - sosuke 10y ago
    I've entertained the idea on multiple occasions that there might be a way to introduce good actors which use traffic calming driving techniques onto the road with the purpose of helping to regulate the flow of traffic. This assumes that there is a way to influence traffic on a large scale by way of a few good drivers.
  - chadgeidel 10y ago
    I've adopted this strategy as well. Anecdotal, but traffic seems "calmer" around me. Maybe that's just because I'm calmer. It also has a nice side effect of not "participating" in stop-and-go traffic and I don't have to clutch/shift as much in my manual transmission. Full disclosure - generally I like to drive fast. I have a sporty car and do several track days per year. I just leave the fast driving to the track (and the mountains in certain cases).
- jacobolus 10y ago
  Rochester is one of those northeastern cities that destroyed its own downtown neighborhoods for the sake of building a moat of highways around the city center. As a visitor, it was depressing how detached the city center was from anything, and how pedestrian-unfriendly and relatively dead the streets were, filled with large office buildings, surface parking lots, and not much else. It’s a “great driving city” because there’s more empty road space than anyone knows what to do with. Enormous waste of space, infrastructure money, and human potential. The pictures from before the 1950s vs. after are stark. http://iqc.ou.edu/2015/01/21/60yrsnortheast/ http://iqc.ou.edu/2015/01/21/60yrsnortheast/
beat 10y ago
This is pretty obvious stuff. People have a limited tolerance for daily work commute of a max one hour each way, whether they're driving 70mph from one suburb to another, or walking from their village to the fields, or hunting and gathering in the woods.
Ensorceled 10y ago
This is a completely unsurprising result. My happiness is strongly correlated with my commute time NOT the speed at which I'm driving. We keep establishing the second part of human nature, for instance better insulation resulted in bigger homes, not energy savings[1] [1] http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/09/as-american-homes-get-bigger-energy-efficiency-gains-are-wiped-out/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/09/as-american-...
1_2__3 10y ago
The daily HN dose of anti-car hysteria is here right on schedule. I can't help but think there's some deep-pocketed companies making sure that "autonomous cars are our only future!" and "there's no point in trying to get the government to spend money on roads!" are the standard refrains on this and other sites frequented by millenials.
- clock_tower 10y ago
  What companies do you have in mind? I'm not aware of any organization that spends heavily on lobbyists and would stand to profit from more trains; train manufacturing is generally a small part of big conglomerates, like Siemens and GE. (This is the product of long, frustrated research on exactly that point.) If it's self-driving cars you're thinking of instead of trains (and self-driving cars are a ludicrous solution, with all the drawbacks and none of the advantages of both cars and trains), they're a fad, and they sort of market themselves. When they fail to deliver in 5-10 years, we'll be free of that crap. The majority of this sentiment is the millenial preference for living in cities like traditional civilized peoples, instead of out in plastic suburbs with no commerce except retail chains and no social activities except TV, Evangelical megachurches, and sportsball. Kunstler's Geography of Nowhere might be worth reading on this subject.
TheCapn 10y ago
I've always been under the impression that commute satisfaction is related to various levels of consistency. Constant speed, constant commute times. I drive 3x as far at my new home to my job as I did at my previous home but since my workplace is on the edge of the city and I moved to a rural home I drive 90% of the way on highway. Set cruise, set podcast, arrive at work in 20 minutes (+/- 5 minutes). Old home? 15 minutes but through a dozen intersections and several road merges and lane changes. Much happier now. EDIT: I should say that my first career job was about 2km from my home. I could choose to drive and battle 10 intersections and then the hell that was parking, or I walked. It took 15 minutes longer but it was consistent and smooth any day of the week, regardless of construction. Highly satisfied.
- jasonmp85 10y ago
  I feel like this is part of the story behind Lyft and Uber. They traded inconsistent timing and consistent pricing for consistent timing and inconsistent pricing. Certain people seem to like the better (I do). I can always get a Lyft in a minute or two in a major city. I might pay slightly more for that at certain times of the day.
  - seanp2k2 10y ago
    It's also about a third of the price of a cab when using UberX or Pool.
brookside 10y ago
I'm definitely of the Mr. Money Mustache school of thought on commuting- there should be a fairly strong reason that you aren't dwelling in place from which you can bike to work. http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/10/06/the-true-cost-of-commuting/ http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/10/06/the-true-cost-of-c...
- Declanomous 10y ago
  I love biking to work, but being able to do that consistently depends as much on the amenities at your office as it does on the distance from your work. Unless you live in Sacramento, or some other place with nearly perfect weather, you are either going to need a locker room and shower at work, or you will need to drive whenever it is snowing or raining. That being said, my commute time has gone from 30 minutes a day to an hour a day as the areas in between where I work and where I live have become more popular. It's a large part of why I'm considering a new job. The commute to work isn't bad, about 20 minutes or so, but the commute home can be more than twice that. The added commute has definitely made me a less happy person in general, due to things like added stress, less free time, etc. Edit: I live in Chicago, and looking at the data the only place that has a slower average speed is Miami. I think the higher than expected satisfaction is from the reasonably good public transit. I'd be much happier if my commute allowed me to easily take the L to work. I'd be interested in seeing individual results from within the city though. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a binomial distribution of some kind.
  - dmm 10y ago
    > or you will need to drive whenever it is snowing or raining. I think you could bike every day, if you wanted to. Fenders would keep dirty road water off you and a rain shell with rain pants would keep you dry. Or if it's warm you can wear shorts and change once you get to work. If it's too snowy to safely bike, should you really be driving? And how much does it really snow anymore? This year Chicago had the first January without measurable snowfall in recorded history :(.
    - Declanomous 10y ago
Neliquat 10y ago
Its not about average speed, its about absence of frusturation events, many just so happening to be backup of traffic, or delay in transport.

104 points by oftenwrong 10y ago

StClaire 10y ago

There's a metaphor for life in there somewhere

dredmorbius 10y ago
One trip in which it's the journey, not the destination.

bbitmaster 10y ago

I disagree with the premise. Happiness with a transportation system does not correlate with the absolute speed you can go. Instead, I think it would correlate with "how many interesting/useful places can I reach with x effort". Most of the regions listed with fast transportation have things spread out much more. If the grocery store is a mile away, and it takes 5 minutes to drive there it is equivalent to being a couple of blocks away and it taking 5 minutes to walk there. (This assumes walking and driving are equally as easy). Or likewise if I had to commute to work every day by car for 1 hour, it doesn't matter how fast the car moves. I lost 1 hour of my time and that hour is traded for transportation happiness. I would argue that the faster regions have things spread out so far that it doesn't make up for the faster travel. I lived in both the Southern U.S. and now in San Francisco and I easily see this as being true. Travel by car in the south is MUCH faster than in SF, but it doesn't make up for way things are spread out.

akgerber 10y ago
That is the premise, and you agree with it? "We have a strong hunch as to why traveling faster might not generate more satisfaction with the transportation system. Faster travel is often correlated with lower density, and longer travel distances to common destinations, such as workplaces, schools and stores."
- wtetzner 10y ago
  I think the real issue is that it seems pretty obvious that people don't drive fast because it makes them happy to go fast. People drive fast because if they don't, it takes them longer to get where they're going. Also, there's another reason I think people like to go fast. If you're stuck behind someone that's going slower than you've been going, you feel trapped and frustrated. It seems like this happens even if the person in front of you is only going a few MPH slower than you were.

exabrial 10y ago

I disagree. I'm much happier on my R1. I get to 75mph much quicker too :D

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
nf05papsjfVbc 10y ago
Unfortunately, not everyone can ride a motorcycle or lives where the other motorists are friendly (or at least not-hostile) to motorcyclists. Many also consider it beyond their tolerance for risk. I am really lucky to live where people are happy to accommodate motorcycles (cars make room for motorcycles to split lanes when we have slow moving traffic) and I use one to commute to work everyday. I do sincerely wish more people could share in the joy of riding a motorcycle :-) However, I am aware that there are places where people are hostile to motorcycles. I just hope that some day things get better.
- louhike 10y ago
  The noise of motorcycles is a problem when you live in cities. I'm afraid most city-dwellers would not be faborable of more motorcycle-friendly cities because of that.
  - mattthebaker 10y ago
    Not all motorcycles are that loud, especially the smaller ones more suitable for getting around IN the city. In proper urban areas, scooters are more convenient anyway -- smaller, more maneuverable, automatic transmissions, and more storage.
  - Arizhel 10y ago
    What's bad is that there's no reason for motorcycles to be loud, with current technology. Car engines these days are whisper-quiet; the exact same could be done with motorcycles. But most motorcyclists (in the US) insist on being obnoxiously loud. I'll bet Italian scooters aren't like this though.

mc32 10y ago

I don't know. I've been on slow systems (SJ VTA, for example) and they are irksome. Also bus lines in SF which take circuitous routes to get you somewhere --they are very frustrating and are reasons I've driven instead of ridden public transit many an occasion. The most frustrating part is you feel like you have no control over the situation. You know you are at the whim of the system and there is no wishing for skipping a stop or overtaking a slow motorist or cyclist.

monster_group 10y ago
I took the bus to work for several years. And I totally get what you are saying about not having control and getting frustrated. But to me the whole point of taking the public transport is to not have to worry about those things in the first place. Don't look at the traffic or how the driver is driving. Read a book, listen to an audio book, learn a new language, put on noise canceling head phones and do meditation - don't worry about how the traffic is or if the bus driver is slow. I did my entire Master's degree on the bus. Two hours of study time every day! After I got done with my Master's I studied tensor calculus on the bus because I wanted to understand general relativity. Nobody to disturb - no kids, no spouse. I don't take the bus anymore because I changed jobs and there is no public transportation available to the new destination. But I would happily take it again if there was one. Also walking to and from the bus/train stop is some physical exercise that otherwise I would not get.
- closeparen 10y ago
  I wish I could do all those things while standing. I do have to look at how the driver is driving to anticipate jerky movements if I want to keep my balance.
akgerber 10y ago
That's because the SJ VTA is a terribly-designed transit system trying to traverse a region built almost entirely built around automobile travel as opposed to walking :)

closeparen 10y ago

This would seem to contradict the finding that lower commute times are associated with overall happiness [0, not the best link but there are many]. Slowing down a metro area by, say, forcing a modal shift towards bicycles will not make conveniently located housing any cheaper. If anything, it'll be more desirable and therefore more expensive. Absent a change in housing spend, commute times will rise and free time will sink. EDIT: I'll add that while I don't live far from work for a bigger yard, I do live far from work so I can have my own apartment, instead of roommates. Having lived both with roommates and without, I'm confident I really am happier this way. [0] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kirsten-dirksen/happiness-research-ranks-_b_829591.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kirsten-dirksen/happiness-rese...

bbarn 10y ago
No metro area is slowed down by bicycles. The longest a commute can be practical by bicycle (by practical I mean for the average, street/work clothes wearing person riding nearly every day) is under ten miles. You're still in the heavily congested car travel radius of any metro at that distance anyway, and bicycle traffic does not impede motor traffic what so ever.
- closeparen 10y ago
  Bicycles don't slow drivers down. Removal of parking infrastructure, with the intention of getting people to switch from cars to bicycles, slows people down. I have a 6 mile/10 minute freeway haul to the last suburban train station on the way to work, then 20 minutes on the train. They've announced a plan to demolish the parking lot at that station and build offices, with the intention that people like me switch to bicycles. There are good reasons to do this, but I think it's absurd to suggest that we'll be equally happy with ~40 minutes added to our daily roundtrip. There are some good arguments. BART will make money from those offices, meaning it needs to ask for less from the taxpayer. There will be fewer traffic accidents near the station, and less polluted air (though the real air pollution problem there is urine). I merely argue that the happiness of the reluctant bicyclists isn't one of them.
  - 10y ago

dbg31415 10y ago

Speak for yourself. When I'm out on the road, top down, if I'm going over 70 I can drive for days. Ideally light traffic, roads with curves, and clear bright visibility. Figuring out how to pass the car in front of me is a puzzle that gives satisfaction when accomplished. Cut my speed down to under 35 in heavy traffic where I just have to trudge along with everyone else, where I have to shift between low gears a lot, or where I'm staring at headlights... man it just isn't fun. (Side note, what's with all the super bright headlights in the last 2-3 years? I see about 20% of new cars with these ridiculously bright lights that just shred my eyes at night -- is it a change in the law or a change in the tech that's allowing these to become so prevalent? Feels like these people are driving cars with their high-beams on... and I can't help but think that the drivers are assholes for doing it.)

saurik 10y ago
I really want to make a giant LED sign to put in my rear view window that says "adjust your headlights: they are blinding me :/" with a switch I can use to turn it on :(.
- r00fus 10y ago
  Just make it out of LEDs bright enough to get the point across.
- mantas 10y ago
  Auto-dimming rear view mirrors are awesome. There're aftermarket options too. They're not cheap but may be worth it if you spend a lot of time driving in the dark in heavy traffic.
  - GrinningFool 10y ago
    I can't stand my autodim mirror. It is always dimming too much and/or at the wrong time.
    - cardiffspaceman 10y ago

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

plaguuuuuu 10y ago

Seems a bit interesting to just ignore the whole s=d/t relationship and go for the 2D graphs. Adding the extra variable and doing some nice 3D charts can only create more meaningful data and conclusions.

barrkel 10y ago

Transport speed increases the feasible size of a city. That size could be to fit more people in, or it could be bigger houses, or whatever; but it effectively creates room for some form of growth, just like a big tree needs a thick trunk.

mantas 10y ago
This. My city is currently in sprawling mode (thanks to commie blocks occupying good spots). Most of the new development happens along the major highways. New quality roads increase development in said direction a lot.

sametmax 10y ago

Speed alone is a useless factor if you don't take in consideration the conditions of the drive. Taking hours in a comfortable train, with my laptop, a power socket and 4G is not the same as in the sub suck standing between to a fat sweating smelling dude and a crying baby. It's not the same if I have an appointment or if I'm going to my holiday. It's not the same if it's cold and raining or sunny with birds singing. People don't just go fast for the sake of speed. It has a purpose. So yeah, slowing down in life is a good advice. Chew and taste the food, exercice, take the time to read, stop to talk to your kids, etc. But all lifes happen in a context. The context is not the same when you have a shitty underpaid job with heavy commute in terrible conditions and 2 kids to drive to school, or, if you are like me, in the sunny south of france driving your cool-ass motorbike. Yeah I take my time, there. But I guaranty you, when I'm in the US traffic, I really don't want to take my time.

jlebrech 10y ago

it's depends how loud the engine is and if it's supposed to make that noise.

pif 10y ago

> We have a strong hunch as to why traveling faster might not generate more satisfaction with the transportation system. Faster travel is often correlated with lower density, and longer travel distances to common destinations, Indeed, who ever thought that speed alone could matter? Time is the key. 2 km at 30 km/h is much better than 60 km at 120 km/h.

threepipeproblm 10y ago

Ivan Illich told us this in the 70's, in "Energy and Equity" http://www.preservenet.com/theory/Illich/EnergyEquity/Energy%20and%20Equity.htm http://www.preservenet.com/theory/Illich/EnergyEquity/Energy...

ashark 10y ago
Thanks for this link. Not done yet, but it's outstanding so far.

binarymax 10y ago

See that blip for Rochester,NY with the top satisfaction and a high speed index? That's where I live and I can say it's the best driving city I've ever experienced. An excellent balance of bandwidth and saturation and average distance, makes most drivers here really easy going and happy. ...unless your trying to get to East Ave Wegmans at 5:30 pm on a Friday :)

eternalban 10y ago
A game I used to play back in the day when I had to drive on the interstates was to maintain sufficient distance to the car in front of me so that anyone could trivially make lane changes, etc. The amazing side effect was that typically the cars behind me would start doing the same thing. It was mildly pleasurable.
- sosuke 10y ago
  I've entertained the idea on multiple occasions that there might be a way to introduce good actors which use traffic calming driving techniques onto the road with the purpose of helping to regulate the flow of traffic. This assumes that there is a way to influence traffic on a large scale by way of a few good drivers.
- chadgeidel 10y ago
  I've adopted this strategy as well. Anecdotal, but traffic seems "calmer" around me. Maybe that's just because I'm calmer. It also has a nice side effect of not "participating" in stop-and-go traffic and I don't have to clutch/shift as much in my manual transmission. Full disclosure - generally I like to drive fast. I have a sporty car and do several track days per year. I just leave the fast driving to the track (and the mountains in certain cases).
jacobolus 10y ago
Rochester is one of those northeastern cities that destroyed its own downtown neighborhoods for the sake of building a moat of highways around the city center. As a visitor, it was depressing how detached the city center was from anything, and how pedestrian-unfriendly and relatively dead the streets were, filled with large office buildings, surface parking lots, and not much else. It’s a “great driving city” because there’s more empty road space than anyone knows what to do with. Enormous waste of space, infrastructure money, and human potential. The pictures from before the 1950s vs. after are stark. http://iqc.ou.edu/2015/01/21/60yrsnortheast/ http://iqc.ou.edu/2015/01/21/60yrsnortheast/

beat 10y ago

This is pretty obvious stuff. People have a limited tolerance for daily work commute of a max one hour each way, whether they're driving 70mph from one suburb to another, or walking from their village to the fields, or hunting and gathering in the woods.

Ensorceled 10y ago

This is a completely unsurprising result. My happiness is strongly correlated with my commute time NOT the speed at which I'm driving. We keep establishing the second part of human nature, for instance better insulation resulted in bigger homes, not energy savings[1] [1] http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/09/as-american-homes-get-bigger-energy-efficiency-gains-are-wiped-out/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/09/as-american-...

1_2__3 10y ago

The daily HN dose of anti-car hysteria is here right on schedule. I can't help but think there's some deep-pocketed companies making sure that "autonomous cars are our only future!" and "there's no point in trying to get the government to spend money on roads!" are the standard refrains on this and other sites frequented by millenials.

clock_tower 10y ago
What companies do you have in mind? I'm not aware of any organization that spends heavily on lobbyists and would stand to profit from more trains; train manufacturing is generally a small part of big conglomerates, like Siemens and GE. (This is the product of long, frustrated research on exactly that point.) If it's self-driving cars you're thinking of instead of trains (and self-driving cars are a ludicrous solution, with all the drawbacks and none of the advantages of both cars and trains), they're a fad, and they sort of market themselves. When they fail to deliver in 5-10 years, we'll be free of that crap. The majority of this sentiment is the millenial preference for living in cities like traditional civilized peoples, instead of out in plastic suburbs with no commerce except retail chains and no social activities except TV, Evangelical megachurches, and sportsball. Kunstler's Geography of Nowhere might be worth reading on this subject.

TheCapn 10y ago

I've always been under the impression that commute satisfaction is related to various levels of consistency. Constant speed, constant commute times. I drive 3x as far at my new home to my job as I did at my previous home but since my workplace is on the edge of the city and I moved to a rural home I drive 90% of the way on highway. Set cruise, set podcast, arrive at work in 20 minutes (+/- 5 minutes). Old home? 15 minutes but through a dozen intersections and several road merges and lane changes. Much happier now. EDIT: I should say that my first career job was about 2km from my home. I could choose to drive and battle 10 intersections and then the hell that was parking, or I walked. It took 15 minutes longer but it was consistent and smooth any day of the week, regardless of construction. Highly satisfied.

jasonmp85 10y ago
I feel like this is part of the story behind Lyft and Uber. They traded inconsistent timing and consistent pricing for consistent timing and inconsistent pricing. Certain people seem to like the better (I do). I can always get a Lyft in a minute or two in a major city. I might pay slightly more for that at certain times of the day.
- seanp2k2 10y ago
  It's also about a third of the price of a cab when using UberX or Pool.

brookside 10y ago

I'm definitely of the Mr. Money Mustache school of thought on commuting- there should be a fairly strong reason that you aren't dwelling in place from which you can bike to work. http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/10/06/the-true-cost-of-commuting/ http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/10/06/the-true-cost-of-c...

Declanomous 10y ago
I love biking to work, but being able to do that consistently depends as much on the amenities at your office as it does on the distance from your work. Unless you live in Sacramento, or some other place with nearly perfect weather, you are either going to need a locker room and shower at work, or you will need to drive whenever it is snowing or raining. That being said, my commute time has gone from 30 minutes a day to an hour a day as the areas in between where I work and where I live have become more popular. It's a large part of why I'm considering a new job. The commute to work isn't bad, about 20 minutes or so, but the commute home can be more than twice that. The added commute has definitely made me a less happy person in general, due to things like added stress, less free time, etc. Edit: I live in Chicago, and looking at the data the only place that has a slower average speed is Miami. I think the higher than expected satisfaction is from the reasonably good public transit. I'd be much happier if my commute allowed me to easily take the L to work. I'd be interested in seeing individual results from within the city though. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a binomial distribution of some kind.
- dmm 10y ago
  > or you will need to drive whenever it is snowing or raining. I think you could bike every day, if you wanted to. Fenders would keep dirty road water off you and a rain shell with rain pants would keep you dry. Or if it's warm you can wear shorts and change once you get to work. If it's too snowy to safely bike, should you really be driving? And how much does it really snow anymore? This year Chicago had the first January without measurable snowfall in recorded history :(.
  - Declanomous 10y ago

Neliquat 10y ago

Its not about average speed, its about absence of frusturation events, many just so happening to be backup of traffic, or delay in transport.