4 ms·

"Geofencing"? Give me a break. Not being able to drive from one place to another in a straight line by car doesn't mean your city is becoming a prison. It's cal

by _dain_ 4y ago

"Geofencing"? Give me a break. Not being able to drive from one place to another in a straight line by car doesn't mean your city is becoming a prison. It's called "filtered permeability" and many cities in the free world (e.g. in the Netherlands) have done it since the 80s and it's fine. You have to go a bit further -- I'm sure you'll be alright a few extra minutes inside your climate-controlled metal box. If like me you don't own a car, you already live in a de facto "geofenced" world. I physically cannot get from my city to the city next door by bicycle in a reasonably fast and safe manner, even though they are less than 10 miles apart. Why? Because the roads aren't safe enough. What should be a pleasant 40 minute journey through the lovely British countryside, is instead a nasty 2 hour trudge through zigzagging housing estate streets and terrifying close passes with lorries on A-roads. Or I could take the train, but it only comes once an hour and there are still annoying trips to and from the stations. Even within my city there are zones where one has to make a 3-4 mile detour on a bike to get between places that are less than a kilometre apart, because the direct path is a 50mph motorway and there are literally no bike paths or canal towpaths or even pedestrian paths to get directly from one to the other. This wasn't done on purpose, just sheer carelessness and car-centric myopia. But that doesn't make it any less infuriating, that I pay for these roads with my taxes yet am unable to use them. Why don't I deserve to have my journey be reasonably direct and safe, just because I don't have a car? And then there are the people who want to ban escooters and rip out bike lanes and so on -- I bet you think that's just common sense and not the cruel assault on liberty and mobility that it really is. For my part I welcome the ULEZ and things like it. Every car taken off the road is a car that can't smash into me.

verisimi 4y ago
Remember you position, and tell me in 5 years tell me whether you are more or less able to move. remindme 5 years, lol. The way you choose to live btw - everywhere by bike, public transport, uber, or wherever - is the biggest part of the trick. You believe you are choosing to go along with the provided plan; quite wise really. If you love cycling, great. Your grannie or child might not. So people in just the next town, are, as you say, now out of bounds to you. And you are happy about it. You already have less freedom of movement than your parents did, and are happy about it. The plans are quite detailed about all the other things you will get a chance to be happy about. Online everything, micromanagements of resources. As long as you are able to maintain a rosey outlook about it all, you're free, right? Just don't choose outside of the (shrinking) menu, and you'll be fine.
- gryf 4y ago
  That was the status quo before fossil fuel proliferation. Most people were priced out of transport. And that's how it's going to be again.
  - Swenrekcah 4y ago
    That’s not even necessary. We can have tremendous public transport for the mass routes and then tiny e-bikes/scooters whatever for the last mile, with safe streets because of fewer cars and better designed streets. So really, everyone can use nice transport and rent the occasional car, the only thing that’s not sustainable is for the majority of people in a city to drive a car for the majority or sometimes all of their trips.
- _dain_ 4y ago
  > Remember you position, and tell me in 5 years tell me whether you are more or less able to move. Checking my local council's upcoming plans for bike lanes and public transport regeneration, I'm pretty confident it will be "more". They're a sluggish lot, our council, but they'll eventually get round to doing the right thing. >If you love cycling, great. Your grannie or child might not I find it absolutely hilarious that of all the examples you could use, you say "grannie or child". Tell me, which two demographics are statistically the least able to drive anywhere? That's right, the very old and the very young. The very old, because of physical and visual impairments that make them unfit to drive (and often, but not always, unfit to cycle). And the very young, who are unable to drive either because it's illegal (<18s) or because they have no money (students and underemployed school leavers). For your information, neither of my grandmothers can drive. And I'd prefer if you didn't just assume that I only cycle because it's an eccentric hobby (I actually do it for health and economic reasons, not for fun). >So people in just the next town, are, as you say, now out of bounds to you. And you are happy about it. I'm not at all happy about it, I believe I used the word "infuriating". It is insane that two cities, both >150,000 people and less than a stones throw from each other, have no safe cycling link. But, at least there are plans to build one, soon(tm). > The plans are quite detailed about all the other things you will get a chance to be happy about. Online everything, micromanagements of resources. My eyes are about to roll out of their sockets. I'll take the safe bike lanes and breathable air, thanks.

by _dain_ 4y ago

verisimi 4y ago

Remember you position, and tell me in 5 years tell me whether you are more or less able to move. remindme 5 years, lol. The way you choose to live btw - everywhere by bike, public transport, uber, or wherever - is the biggest part of the trick. You believe you are choosing to go along with the provided plan; quite wise really. If you love cycling, great. Your grannie or child might not. So people in just the next town, are, as you say, now out of bounds to you. And you are happy about it. You already have less freedom of movement than your parents did, and are happy about it. The plans are quite detailed about all the other things you will get a chance to be happy about. Online everything, micromanagements of resources. As long as you are able to maintain a rosey outlook about it all, you're free, right? Just don't choose outside of the (shrinking) menu, and you'll be fine.

gryf 4y ago
That was the status quo before fossil fuel proliferation. Most people were priced out of transport. And that's how it's going to be again.
- Swenrekcah 4y ago
  That’s not even necessary. We can have tremendous public transport for the mass routes and then tiny e-bikes/scooters whatever for the last mile, with safe streets because of fewer cars and better designed streets. So really, everyone can use nice transport and rent the occasional car, the only thing that’s not sustainable is for the majority of people in a city to drive a car for the majority or sometimes all of their trips.
_dain_ 4y ago
> Remember you position, and tell me in 5 years tell me whether you are more or less able to move. Checking my local council's upcoming plans for bike lanes and public transport regeneration, I'm pretty confident it will be "more". They're a sluggish lot, our council, but they'll eventually get round to doing the right thing. >If you love cycling, great. Your grannie or child might not I find it absolutely hilarious that of all the examples you could use, you say "grannie or child". Tell me, which two demographics are statistically the least able to drive anywhere? That's right, the very old and the very young. The very old, because of physical and visual impairments that make them unfit to drive (and often, but not always, unfit to cycle). And the very young, who are unable to drive either because it's illegal (<18s) or because they have no money (students and underemployed school leavers). For your information, neither of my grandmothers can drive. And I'd prefer if you didn't just assume that I only cycle because it's an eccentric hobby (I actually do it for health and economic reasons, not for fun). >So people in just the next town, are, as you say, now out of bounds to you. And you are happy about it. I'm not at all happy about it, I believe I used the word "infuriating". It is insane that two cities, both >150,000 people and less than a stones throw from each other, have no safe cycling link. But, at least there are plans to build one, soon(tm). > The plans are quite detailed about all the other things you will get a chance to be happy about. Online everything, micromanagements of resources. My eyes are about to roll out of their sockets. I'll take the safe bike lanes and breathable air, thanks.