3 ms·

>> None or few of those options are particularly accessible. At the moment, neither are self-driving cars sufficiently capable to replace human drivers. We're

>> None or few of those options are particularly accessible. At the moment, neither are self-driving cars sufficiently capable to replace human drivers. We're chasing a future tech dream when we already have technology that can solve the problems we are facing right now. Edit: What do you mean by "accessible"? The London underground and generally public transport in the UK works very well. Speaking after having lived there for 15 years, studying and working in London and a smaller town, and never having owed a car.

atlasunshrugged 4y ago
+1 on London underground being very accessible. Although I only lived there for a few months, it was insanely easy to get around relative to American cities I've lived in (San Diego, SF, DC) although I think Berlin's combination of train and tram was even better
zinekeller 4y ago
> the London Underground Just going with the parent comment and I'm asking when did you last use the Underground and what station do you think has accessibility issues? I found that the London system is pretty much accessible with aggressive retrofitting on older stations, but I'll acknowledge that if you have used it say more than 10 years ago then I understand.
- YeGoblynQueenne 4y ago
  I think you're replying to the child of my comment?
- tim333 4y ago
  Oxford Circus you still have to be able to walk up/down stairs.
- ghusbands 4y ago
  I've used it plenty and still use it. It is getting better in places, but just look at the tube map - large parts of the system still lack step-free access, let alone the problems the system has in other ways (overcrowding and people not giving up their seats or making space appropriately); we should be trying for (in-city) transport systems that don't require such congregation. The last time I travelled the tube with a wheelchair user with a pain condition, the (non-strike) closures hit in such a way that we couldn't reach our destination without going on a detour that was so long (more than an hour) that the system assumed we'd forgotten to swipe out and back in and charged a penalty fare. The people manning the help-intercoms were unable to assist in finding a route that didn't have closures. And it's normal to have to find alternative, slower routes than the ones everyone else can take.
brimwats 4y ago
I can tell you've never tried to use the Underground with a wheelchair, tho if you're questioning what accessible means in that context—because it's really bad. cars are very accessible for those with mobility disabilities & for many others.
- YeGoblynQueenne 4y ago
  Ah, my bad - literally "accessible". I don't use a wheelchair and I don't know about the London underground but I can tell you that public transport in the small town I lived for 15 years were eminently accessible, as evidenced by the continuous presense of passengers with obvious (and varied) mobility issues on them. In any case improving accessibility on public transport also does not require any new technology that we don't know how to create. It just requires political will.
  - ghusbands 4y ago
    This is a common refrain, that things must be accessible because you see people with mobility issues using them. But it's not true - the people you see are the people who are coping with it, either all the time or on that day. You don't see all the people for whom it is not accessible. It's well-known in disabled circles that most public transport is hit and miss at best and exclusionary/ableist/injuring at worst. Actually solving the problem does involve new technology, because the worst cases need door-to-door access and most cannot afford taxis (nor do welfare systems provide them). What makes it all harder though is the continual fight to persuade every last person that it is a significant problem, because they're so sure it can't be.

atlasunshrugged 4y ago

+1 on London underground being very accessible. Although I only lived there for a few months, it was insanely easy to get around relative to American cities I've lived in (San Diego, SF, DC) although I think Berlin's combination of train and tram was even better

zinekeller 4y ago

> the London Underground Just going with the parent comment and I'm asking when did you last use the Underground and what station do you think has accessibility issues? I found that the London system is pretty much accessible with aggressive retrofitting on older stations, but I'll acknowledge that if you have used it say more than 10 years ago then I understand.

YeGoblynQueenne 4y ago
I think you're replying to the child of my comment?
tim333 4y ago
Oxford Circus you still have to be able to walk up/down stairs.
ghusbands 4y ago
I've used it plenty and still use it. It is getting better in places, but just look at the tube map - large parts of the system still lack step-free access, let alone the problems the system has in other ways (overcrowding and people not giving up their seats or making space appropriately); we should be trying for (in-city) transport systems that don't require such congregation. The last time I travelled the tube with a wheelchair user with a pain condition, the (non-strike) closures hit in such a way that we couldn't reach our destination without going on a detour that was so long (more than an hour) that the system assumed we'd forgotten to swipe out and back in and charged a penalty fare. The people manning the help-intercoms were unable to assist in finding a route that didn't have closures. And it's normal to have to find alternative, slower routes than the ones everyone else can take.

brimwats 4y ago

I can tell you've never tried to use the Underground with a wheelchair, tho if you're questioning what accessible means in that context—because it's really bad. cars are very accessible for those with mobility disabilities & for many others.

YeGoblynQueenne 4y ago
Ah, my bad - literally "accessible". I don't use a wheelchair and I don't know about the London underground but I can tell you that public transport in the small town I lived for 15 years were eminently accessible, as evidenced by the continuous presense of passengers with obvious (and varied) mobility issues on them. In any case improving accessibility on public transport also does not require any new technology that we don't know how to create. It just requires political will.
- ghusbands 4y ago
  This is a common refrain, that things must be accessible because you see people with mobility issues using them. But it's not true - the people you see are the people who are coping with it, either all the time or on that day. You don't see all the people for whom it is not accessible. It's well-known in disabled circles that most public transport is hit and miss at best and exclusionary/ableist/injuring at worst. Actually solving the problem does involve new technology, because the worst cases need door-to-door access and most cannot afford taxis (nor do welfare systems provide them). What makes it all harder though is the continual fight to persuade every last person that it is a significant problem, because they're so sure it can't be.