3 ms·
Cities shouldn't be designed for cars. If anything, it should be the other way around. Additionally, the idea of living directly in a city to be a luxury reall
by sneakernets 8y ago
Cities shouldn't be designed for cars. If anything, it should be the other way around.
Additionally, the idea of living directly in a city to be a luxury really destroys the justification of a "city" in the first place, in my opinion. The whole idea of suburbs throughout human history was the luxury of not being in a city, but thanks to that mentality + the Baby Boom, modern cities are now glorified business parks.
- bko 8y ago> Cities shouldn't be designed for cars. If anything, it should be the other way around. I think that would be easier to do with self-driving cars as opposed to human driven cars for the reasons I mentioned in the parent post
- Nasrudith 8y ago> Cities shouldn't be designed for cars. If anything, it should be the other way around. Sounds like a perfect being the enemy of the good issue. Whether or not cities are designed for cars is separate from 'should the cars be self-driving'. That sort of hairshirt anti-harm reduction has a poor track record. > The whole idea of suburbs throughout human history was the luxury of not being in a city, but thanks to that mentality + the Baby Boom, modern cities are now glorified business parks. That isn't true actually historically it was the reverse where the outskirts of the city were where the poor went, especially when it meant being outside of the protection of city walls! We are just seeing the trend reverse itself.