3 ms·

Because the engineering design doesn’t just prioritize cars it fundamentally presumes cars. If the result is something unsafe: 1) they will use individual res

by avs733 5y ago

Because the engineering design doesn’t just prioritize cars it fundamentally presumes cars. If the result is something unsafe: 1) they will use individual responsibility arguments on drivers to blame them 2) blame pedestrians or cyclists or whoever for failing to defer to cars It’s not a legality problem it’s a philosophy one.

goodpoint 5y ago
> It’s not a legality problem it’s a philosophy one. This is not a dichotomy. The legal aspect comes from the "philosophical" one that comes for lobby money.
- avs733 5y ago
  I agree, but I think for the purposes of this conversation it fits...laws emerge from the philosophy. simply making an effort to change the laws won't change the philosophy, it will just be an anachronism standing against the dominant philosophy.
landryraccoon 5y ago
This doesn't fully explain the phenomenon because stroads are terrible for drivers. They cause congestion and are much slower than actual roads, while still being unfriendly to pedestrians and bikers. They're bad for drivers and bad for pedestrians.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  They're cheap and they get land owners who want access to shut up. "there, you have your road, now stop telling us how to spend your tax dollars"
  - landryraccoon 5y ago
    It's even worse. They're not cheap at all. They're cheap to build but expensive to maintain. https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/2/5/the-true-cost-of-a-stroad https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/2/5/the-true-cost-o...
- avs733 5y ago
  This probably sounds pedantic but…they are terrible for drivers but they are good for cars. They are designed for cars not drivers effectively. They suck at vehicle throughout in a broad sense but they are theoretically more efficient than the other design options available. The pramaterizarion is largely around the dynamics of the cars not human behavior. It’s the over algorithmization of decision making. It’s like YouTube radicalizing people by showing them videos that increase engagement. It’s not intentional in a strict sense, it’s just mindless adherence to a process without thinking.

by avs733 5y ago

goodpoint 5y ago

> It’s not a legality problem it’s a philosophy one. This is not a dichotomy. The legal aspect comes from the "philosophical" one that comes for lobby money.

avs733 5y ago
I agree, but I think for the purposes of this conversation it fits...laws emerge from the philosophy. simply making an effort to change the laws won't change the philosophy, it will just be an anachronism standing against the dominant philosophy.

landryraccoon 5y ago

This doesn't fully explain the phenomenon because stroads are terrible for drivers. They cause congestion and are much slower than actual roads, while still being unfriendly to pedestrians and bikers. They're bad for drivers and bad for pedestrians.

throwaway0a5e 5y ago
They're cheap and they get land owners who want access to shut up. "there, you have your road, now stop telling us how to spend your tax dollars"
- landryraccoon 5y ago
  It's even worse. They're not cheap at all. They're cheap to build but expensive to maintain. https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/2/5/the-true-cost-of-a-stroad https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/2/5/the-true-cost-o...
avs733 5y ago
This probably sounds pedantic but…they are terrible for drivers but they are good for cars. They are designed for cars not drivers effectively. They suck at vehicle throughout in a broad sense but they are theoretically more efficient than the other design options available. The pramaterizarion is largely around the dynamics of the cars not human behavior. It’s the over algorithmization of decision making. It’s like YouTube radicalizing people by showing them videos that increase engagement. It’s not intentional in a strict sense, it’s just mindless adherence to a process without thinking.