4 ms·

A good argument can be made that using the residential streets is best for "society overall." The amount it disrupts those who live in the neighborhood could ve

A good argument can be made that using the residential streets is best for "society overall." The amount it disrupts those who live in the neighborhood could very well be outweighed by a large reduction of wasted time by all those stuck in a traffic jam.

gerbilly 9y ago
I'd argue the harm to a neighbourhood street far outweighs the needs of people in cars. It creates noise, discourages kids from playing outside, basically it decreases the quality of life generally when the street you live on becomes a river of traffic. Basically, this new innovation disrupts a balance that has been achieved incrementally over time. Go into any neighbourhood and talk to people and you will find that over time they have called the city councillor spoken to each other to come to an agreement about how their street is to be used, from parking issues, to street furniture to common access to some areas such as school parking lots off hours for example. Some of these agreements are formal, others informal and unspoken, but they always exist. I don't buy your argument that waze, by optimizing for a single variable, and which ignores all of these agreements between residents can be a greater benefit 'overall.' Also, by solving the congestion problem this way, they actually divert attention away from proper solutions being implemented at the city level.
- colefichter 9y ago
  This idea that local residents are more entitled to the street becomes problematic, though. I live in a high-rise condo on a busy arterial road in the city centre. Should my enjoyment of the street override the needs of suburbanites to commute to work daily? I might think so, but somehow I don't think the suggestion that we should force thousands of people onto public transit or bicycles or whatever is going to wash. So then the question becomes, why are people in certain neighbourhoods entitled to things that people in other neighbourhoods clearly are not entitled to? If others can use "my" street when they please, why can't I do the same on "their" street?
lightedman 9y ago
Streets are made for driving upon. If people don't like people driving on their streets, they should vote to get rid of them. To boot, most people in those neighborhoods SHOULD be going to work anyways, so they shouldn't notice people going up and down their streets for the most part. We haven't hit Japan's retirement-age population level problem, yet.
- gerbilly 9y ago
  Don't tell people what they should do. Maybe they work from home, maybe they don't work at all, what the heck does work ethic have to do with it?
  - lightedman 9y ago
    "Don't tell people what they should do." The pure irony of your statement.
    - gerbilly 9y ago
      There is no irony[1]. I never told people not to use waze, just pointed out the consequences of doing so at scale on existing political arrangements made in society. 1. Perhaps hypocrisy, is the word you really meant. Nobody knows what irony means anymore.
      - lightedman 9y ago
        Hypocrisy and Irony are very closely linked hand-in-hand, so closely in fact that the words can effectively be substituted for each other in this instance. It is hypocritical for someone to tell me to not tell someone what to do (and in fact, my 'telling someone what to do' was a suggestion, since voting is not a mandatory thing in the USA where I post from) since they are doing the same thing in effect, and it is ironic since they are effectively performing the very behavior they're wanting me to not do. I had the last vestiges of a 'good' education, where one could use good logic to explain the usage of a word not commonly used in such a manner. I attended the 4th best independent school district in the nation at the time. That district no longer exists and hasn't in true form for over 20 years. The students are now meth and heroin addicts. My hometown has the title of heroin capital of the USA because the amount of black tar exceedingly overwhelms the COMBINED shipments (calculated) of powder and crack cocaine FOR THE NATION, and has done this consistently since it was featured on Channel One news twenty years ago.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

gerbilly 9y ago

I'd argue the harm to a neighbourhood street far outweighs the needs of people in cars. It creates noise, discourages kids from playing outside, basically it decreases the quality of life generally when the street you live on becomes a river of traffic. Basically, this new innovation disrupts a balance that has been achieved incrementally over time. Go into any neighbourhood and talk to people and you will find that over time they have called the city councillor spoken to each other to come to an agreement about how their street is to be used, from parking issues, to street furniture to common access to some areas such as school parking lots off hours for example. Some of these agreements are formal, others informal and unspoken, but they always exist. I don't buy your argument that waze, by optimizing for a single variable, and which ignores all of these agreements between residents can be a greater benefit 'overall.' Also, by solving the congestion problem this way, they actually divert attention away from proper solutions being implemented at the city level.

colefichter 9y ago
This idea that local residents are more entitled to the street becomes problematic, though. I live in a high-rise condo on a busy arterial road in the city centre. Should my enjoyment of the street override the needs of suburbanites to commute to work daily? I might think so, but somehow I don't think the suggestion that we should force thousands of people onto public transit or bicycles or whatever is going to wash. So then the question becomes, why are people in certain neighbourhoods entitled to things that people in other neighbourhoods clearly are not entitled to? If others can use "my" street when they please, why can't I do the same on "their" street?

lightedman 9y ago

Streets are made for driving upon. If people don't like people driving on their streets, they should vote to get rid of them. To boot, most people in those neighborhoods SHOULD be going to work anyways, so they shouldn't notice people going up and down their streets for the most part. We haven't hit Japan's retirement-age population level problem, yet.

gerbilly 9y ago
Don't tell people what they should do. Maybe they work from home, maybe they don't work at all, what the heck does work ethic have to do with it?
- lightedman 9y ago
  "Don't tell people what they should do." The pure irony of your statement.
  - gerbilly 9y ago
    There is no irony[1]. I never told people not to use waze, just pointed out the consequences of doing so at scale on existing political arrangements made in society. 1. Perhaps hypocrisy, is the word you really meant. Nobody knows what irony means anymore.
    - lightedman 9y ago
      Hypocrisy and Irony are very closely linked hand-in-hand, so closely in fact that the words can effectively be substituted for each other in this instance. It is hypocritical for someone to tell me to not tell someone what to do (and in fact, my 'telling someone what to do' was a suggestion, since voting is not a mandatory thing in the USA where I post from) since they are doing the same thing in effect, and it is ironic since they are effectively performing the very behavior they're wanting me to not do. I had the last vestiges of a 'good' education, where one could use good logic to explain the usage of a word not commonly used in such a manner. I attended the 4th best independent school district in the nation at the time. That district no longer exists and hasn't in true form for over 20 years. The students are now meth and heroin addicts. My hometown has the title of heroin capital of the USA because the amount of black tar exceedingly overwhelms the COMBINED shipments (calculated) of powder and crack cocaine FOR THE NATION, and has done this consistently since it was featured on Channel One news twenty years ago.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]