41 ms·
Armed with traffic cones, protesters are immobilizing driverless cars
- JoeAltmaier 3y agoSo, they create traffic blockages as a sort of civic disobedience? How is this helping anyone? I guess they get to feel the thrill of outrage culture for a bit. And brag to their friends "I made a thousand people late for work!"
- cozzyd 3y agoI would say the driverless cars are making the blockages, if they're not able to deal with this totally predictable light vandalism
- phpisthebest 3y agoVandalism is illegal, I hope these companies open up civil action against these protestors individually for lost revenue, and costs
- cozzyd 3y agoSure and so is speeding, double parking, not stopping at stop signs and failing to signal, but the cars still have to deal with that. I'm not condoning the protestors but failure to deal with this (and other similar things... Minor mechanical trouble, birds shitting on sensors, brushing snow off windshield) is a real problem for autonomous cars.
- blurker 3y ago[flagged]
- dandellion 3y agoMost accidents have human drivers, shouldn't they protest those if they're so concerned?
- blurker 3y agoWell yes, and many do! Most cities now have vision zero movements in part because of this.
- BurningFrog 3y ago[dead]
- Zigurd 3y agoI think this particular protest is counterproductive. AVs will make public transit work a lot better and reduce traffic, make pedestrians safer, etc. But protest isn't meant to be convenient.
- ajuc 3y ago> AVs will make public transit work a lot better and reduce traffic, make pedestrians safer, etc Highly doubt it. 1. if you have a regular car you get from point A to B, park, do sth, go from B to A. If you use AV it has to go from point X to A, take you to B, go do sth else at Y, you do your thing, it has to go back from Z to B and take you to A. Instead of using the road from A to B and back you're using the road from X to A, from A to B and back and from Z to B (going from B to Y counts for the other customer so I don't add it). It uses road LONGER per passanger - so traffic will be WORSE and it will use MORE fuel. It will save some parking space tho. Basicaly AVs (and taxis/ubers etc.) trade parking space for road space and fuel. You can't reduce traffic by driving more :) 2. it will only make pedestrians safer if it drives conservatively, but from what I've seen by AV advocacy is people want AV cars to interface with each other and use that to cut the safety margin for efficiency. That's an inherently American idea that assumes people don't walk so you can just change cars and everything will be fine :) It would make pedestrians inherently less safe (because AVs become a train basically - you cannot suddenly stop 1 AV because other are behind it and they assume it won't suddenly stop). If you want a city in which every street is effectively a rail track and every pedestrian crossing is a train crossing with all the disruption to pedestrians and others - do this. Otherwise just use public transport and bikes, please - all the benefits and more, for fraction of cost, and it's healthier. Moving individual people in huge cars just doesn't scale, no matter who drives them.
- ghaff 3y agoAs someone who lives far enough out of the nearest major city that I don't really pop in casually for a meal or drink. (It's very doable but I end up being on the road for a good two hours total around whatever activity I'm doing.) An AV wouldn't be free to travel that distance but I would absolutely do that and other activities requiring 1+ hour drives each way more frequently if I didn't need to do the driving myself.
- seadan83 3y ago> And brag to their friends "I made a thousand people late for work!" Seems like the protestors are not required for this to happen: > The city’s transportation agencies documented several incidents where driverless cars disrupted Muni service. During the night of Sept. 23, five Cruise cars blocked traffic lanes on Mission Street in Bernal Heights, stalling a Muni bus for 45 minutes. On at least three different occasions, Cruise cars stopped on Muni light-rail tracks, halting service. Meanwhile, these additional things are happening: > San Francisco firefighters were battling a two-alarm apartment blaze on the corner of Hayes and Divisadero streets during a recent Sunday morning when a driverless Cruise car entered the active firefighting scene and nearly ran over fire hoses on the street. > Firefighters at the scene stood in front of the car to try to get it to stop, but the autonomous vehicle came to a halt only after one of them smashed the Cruise car’s front window amid the chaotic effort to put out a fire that displaced 25 people, according to city transportation officials. > A Cruise vehicle came to a stop after nearly colliding with a Muni N-Judah train at the intersection of Carl and Cole streets. The Cruise car blocked light-rail tracks in both directions for close to seven minutes. https://www.sfchronicle.com/projects/2023/self-driving-cars/ https://www.sfchronicle.com/projects/2023/self-driving-cars/ > A passenger in a driverless Cruise vehicle suffered injuries on Thursday after the vehicle was struck by a San Francisco fire truck that was responding to an emergency call. > Now, the California Department of Motor Vehicles has requested the autonomous vehicle company cut its San Francisco fleet in half, following this latest incident. Cruise told KTVU the company will comply with that request. https://www.ktvu.com/news/cruise-robotaxi-with-passenger-crashes-into-san-francisco-fire-truck https://www.ktvu.com/news/cruise-robotaxi-with-passenger-cra...
- ZoomerCretin 3y agoWhat is your point? That the cars themselves sometimes block traffic, therefore it's okay for protestors to stop them and block traffic?
- deprecative 3y agoThat's literally the point of a protest.
- 3y ago
- xyst 3y agoThe fact that a single car can even cause this much harm is a sign of a much larger problem: car centric transportation is NOT scalable. They are testing this crap in TX and the roads here are shit, worse after/during rain events. Have seen multiple times where a traffic light goes out or the lines are not legible and the “autonomous” vehicle just sits there with its hazard lights on.
- jbotdev 3y agoTo be fair, public transport often has similar issues. If a subway/train car is stuck, nothing else can get by on the same track and thousands of people could be delayed. It happens in NYC all the time. At least with the road system there are typically ways to get around stopped cars.
- soligern 3y agoThat’s stupid. You could park a golf cart on the train tracks and it would shut down all train transport for hours. You could cut out a piece of the rail very easily (with an angle grinder) and it would cause dozens of deaths and shut down the line for weeks. The right course of action is to make messing with automated cars like this a crime just like it is with the railways.
- almost_usual 3y agoCutting a train track with an angle grinder isn’t the same as taking less than five seconds to put a traffic cone on a car. It takes them 30 minutes in this video. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ISjDp5lL7_Q https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ISjDp5lL7_Q
- soligern 3y agoYou could disable a diverter in 5 seconds with a sledge hammer. Also your linked video is splitting along the length of the rail instead of cutting directly across it which would take minutes if not seconds.
- 3y ago
- jgerrish 3y ago> How is this helping anyone? One could argue it's utilizing a set of free people to create a Chaos Monkey-esque environment to train cars. This increases resilience and speeds up the timeline for driverless cars. Which of course decreases alcohol-related fatalities. It's that last part that is tough to argue against. Of course, there is the stress of creating an identity politics cultural clash in a city of millions. These are people who we now face on an incredible divide. It takes work, and it costs stress, to bridge that. Over two decades ago, after the first dot-com crash, I remember one of the last statements from a SF resident before I left. That it was my fault, or the people like me, that the city ended up the way it did. That stung. A lot. But, you cant argue we're not saving lives from drunk drivers. That's something that will help on both coasts and the middle.
- yayitswei 3y agoNitpick: SF has less than a million residents (although many more commute to work there).
- Ar-Curunir 3y agoProtests are inconvenient. That’s the point.
- black_13 3y ago[dead]
- Fricken 3y agoThe civilians should be more obedient while we work on new and devious ways of extracting rent from them.
- milsorgen 3y agoThey "protested" city bikes, scooters and ebikes a while back too. It was essentially a justification and excuse to destroy them in various ways.
- pipeline_peak 3y agoThey’re outraged that their city is being used as a testing ground for driver safety.
- blurker 3y agoOne of the four commissioners (John Reynolds) of the California Public Utilities Commission who voted to approve the expansion previously worked at Cruise [1]. I'm not sure about the others' backgrounds, but that's already 25% of the vote with a conflict of interest. - https://www.bbc.com/news/business-66478070 https://www.bbc.com/news/business-66478070
- plandis 3y agoI’m not sure having a board comprised without industry experts is a good idea.
- 1letterunixname 3y agoBut I'm certain having the foxes guarding the hen house is a terrible idea.
- WicWacWok 3y agoIsn't that trivially a conflict of interest?
- fastball 3y agoUsually it goes the other way: being on the board and then being given a position at Cruise. Having worked for a company in the past doesn't mean you like the company or will be soft on them. In fact, many people hate their former employers. So without anything further than "they used to work at a big company in San Francisco", it doesn't seem like a conflict of interest to me.
- WicWacWok 3y ago> Having worked for a company in the past doesn't mean you like the company or will be soft on them. This often is implied, actually. Better safe than sorry.
- pengaru 3y agoOnce enough of a city's inhabitants become adversarial towards robotaxis, the technology is done for. Their only means of long-term success is if the people cooperatively tolerate their existence on the roads. If you need a security guard in every vehicle to defend it, you have a driver.
- pierat 3y ago[flagged]
- Zigurd 3y agoThe US is too lo-density for human driven buses to be better for the environment. AVs will enable a transit fleet of right-sized vehicles that respond to demand and can surge without a big labor force working split shifts.
- pierat 3y agoHAH that is one of the most ridiculous excuses... and is also directly refuted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ ^^ "Not Just Bikes"
- Zigurd 3y agoI have ridden commuter rail, aubways, and busses in New York, Boston, San Francisco, Amsterdam, London, Vienna and other places. While you have a point that "lo-density" is an oversimplification, only New York has the kind of density and frequency of service that make public transit really usable. Boston commuter rail sucks pretty bad, with a too-sparse schedule. BART from SFO to the city is OK but around town there are too few lines and stops. This all could be fixed, but the fact is they suck compared to cities like Amsterdam where cycling has the infrastructure and the critical mass to be safe (unlike London, for example).
- kiba 3y agoThere are plenty of area that could support mass transit, especially in cities. Even suburbia can be made more walkable. For example, walking to my local gas station isn't really that practical due to a lack of continuous sidewalks. It isn't that far but the path to the gas station can get pretty muddy at time. I once tried to get food at a fast food joint by walking, the lack of sidewalks is even more acute. Crossing several lanes of road felt pretty unsafe even when the traffic light is red.
- pierat 3y agoSo instead of reading commentary masquerading as "news", here's the actual group doing this: https://www.safestreetrebel.com/ https://www.safestreetrebel.com/ https://sfba.social/@SafeStreetRebel https://sfba.social/@SafeStreetRebel (Note: news orgs don't want to send you outside their site, so no links for you on NPR, etc.) I think it would be fair to say this is a climate emergency response group, to protest getting personal transit off the roads, and start re-wilding millions of square kilometers of asphalt.
- petee 3y agoActually there is a link within the article, and most of the links leave npr.org
- kylecazar 3y agoI do not like that they make open plans to slow down traffic, per the linked site.
- rafram 3y ago> sacrifice an unacceptable amount of their income to pay for basic transpiration They could do with a proofreader.
- foota 3y agoThey seem like a bunch of zealots, in particular, I find this amusing "We're proud to stand with the San Francisco Taxi Workers Alliance" I'm confused, are you pro cars or anti cars?
- RiOuseR 3y ago[dead]
- tqi 3y ago> I think it would be fair to say this is a climate emergency response group, to protest getting personal transit off the roads, and start re-wilding millions of square kilometers of asphalt. I think it would be fair to say these are self aggrandizing idiots with delusions of grandeur.
- anovikov 3y ago[flagged]
- voz_ 3y ago[flagged]
- phpisthebest 3y agoThe biggest problem here is that they needed permission in the first place. We have completely inverted how society is suppose to work. Government should have to provide a clear, articulable justification to make something illegal People should not have to petition the government for permission to do something, if everything is defacto illegal with out government approval you no longer live in a free society
- arrosenberg 3y ago> Government should have to provide a clear, articulable justification to make something illegal The roads are owned and paid for by the public, ergo the government can set rules for safety and maintenance. That seems clear and articulate enough to me.
- phpisthebest 3y agoSo then I take you oppose the protesters. because you can not have ti both ways, you can not claim to outsource your thinking to the government for your safety, who have approved this technology while at the same time opposing this technology.
- seadan83 3y agoThis is a bad faith argument. Please review the hacker news discussion guide lines.
- arrosenberg 3y agoNot really relevant to my argument, but sure. I never asked to have it both ways - I don’t like the technology, but they are allowed to be operating. Civil disobedience is also an American tradition, so I don’t oppose it, nor would I oppose the police for enforcing the law.
- bendergarcia 3y agoIt’s because corporations show time and time again to cut corners and do harmful things. Everything should be de facto illegal and companies should have to prove that it should be made legal through research and data. Things will move much slower but at this point I’d rather that than another Uber airbnb who “disrupts” the market but actually causes many negative externalities.
- gedy 3y agoThis is another reason it’s probably a bad idea to do this type of technology company and testing in a place like San Francisco. It’s not surprising companies like this end up in Texas, etc.
- petee 3y agoInstead they would be peppered with bullet holes; I doubt these cars would be warmly welcomed in TX either, at least until the experimentation phase is over
- forinti 3y agoA few years ago I wrote a short story on how people would force cars to stop in order to extort money from the passengers. I thought such a thing would first happen in Rio. It's inevitable, whatever the reason: if the car won't run over people or things, whoever wants to stop them will do so.
- the-dude 3y agoYou are being too modest : post the link!
- forinti 3y agoIt's in Portuguese, though: http://alquerubim.blogspot.com/2016/11/o-caos-imposto-pela-ordem.html http://alquerubim.blogspot.com/2016/11/o-caos-imposto-pela-o...
- the-dude 3y agohttps://alquerubim-blogspot-com.translate.goog/2016/11/o-caos-imposto-pela-ordem.html?_x_tr_sch=http&_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp https://alquerubim-blogspot-com.translate.goog/2016/11/o-cao... 2050! The ordeal reminds me of Rome, which I visited as a teenager. I discovered if you didn't take a risk / put your life on the line, cars wouldn't stop at a zebra(crossing).
- shortcake27 3y agoYou speak as if criminals don’t already exist; as if it isn’t currently possible to rob a house, or someone on the street, or a car stopped at traffic lights. If someone wants to commit a robbery there are already plenty of ways they can do it. I fail to see how autonomous vehicles would increase the rate of crime.
- forinti 3y agoIt's one thing to rob someone, it's quite another to ask for five bob to get out of the way.
- iancmceachern 3y agoI'm selling bumper stickers that say "Self Driving Cars Have so soul". Just go to that phrase dot com.
- tomjen3 3y agoIn twenty years it will be the subject of an article "can you believe how stupid people were back then".
- xyst 3y agoIf the unmanned vehicles with multibillion dollar AI can be impeded by a $12-15 traffic cone. This might be a sign that autonomous vehicles in highly dense, and urban areas is a huge fucking mistake.
- influxmoment 3y agoI'm not sure if the cars are the problem. Many things can be disabled with malicious vandalism. We can ban automated elevators because people can put a stick in them and break them
- nerdbert 3y agoA traffic cone on the hood is not "malicious vandalism"; it doesn't cause any damage to the vehicle.
- JKCalhoun 3y agoWait until they end up in the bay like Lime scooters.
- lexandstuff 3y agoYou can impede manned vehicles with traffic cones in exactly the same way. Randomly put them on roads, and people will stop, causing traffic jams. Throw them under the wheels of moving cars, and people will crash and likely die. Allowing people to drive 2-tonne death traps around dense urban areas seems like a bigger mistake.
- whoisstan 3y agoAutonomous Trap 001 by James Bridle comes to mind https://jamesbridle.com/works/autonomous-trap-001 https://jamesbridle.com/works/autonomous-trap-001
- johnea 3y agoMan, how many articles are we going to see on this subject?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- hindsightbias 3y ago[flagged]
- libraryatnight 3y agoThis is so lame. What a confused bunch of idiots.
- fastball 3y ago> "We thought that putting cones on these [driverless cars] was a funny image that could captivate people," says one organizer. "One of these self-driving cars with billions of dollars of venture capital investment money and R&D, just being disabled by a common traffic cone." So basically they're just idiots. Yes, deliberate sabotage does have a way of messing things up, no matter how much money something is worth / has been spent. If you stab a billionaire they bleed, just like the common folk!
- leetcrew 3y agoright, it is almost always cheaper to destroy something than it is to build it. there is some beauty to this principle, in a cosmic sense, but this particular stunt doesn't impress me either.
- elromulous 3y agoThis is so often true. I can think of one notable exception, rocket counter measures[0]. Perhaps there is some inversion, since this is destroy(destroy()). [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Dome https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Dome
- thefourthchime 3y agoThey did an interview with the guys from NYT's Hard Fork (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/hard-fork/id1528594034?i=1000624136280 https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/hard-fork/id1528594034...). When asked what their act of protest was against, they said "cars in general." They're very anti-car and, although they acknowledge that self-driving cars will be much safer in the long term and could transform a world full of wasteful single-car ownership, they are adamant that cars shouldn't exist. Yes, they're in their 20s and enjoy riding their bikes in San Francisco.
- Kerb_ 3y agoThey argue for "public transit, walking and bikes" according to their website. Bikes are mainly how they choose to protest, but they want accessible public transit. Your last sentence is phrased like a "gotcha" but seems like a disingenuous way to say that young members of the community are organizing over this cause.
- aussieguy1234 3y agoI don't think this will be very effective in the long run as a way to stop driverless cars, which promise to help all kinds of people currently unable or unwilling to drive to get around. Likely Scenario: The driver behind notices the driverless car is immobilized by the traffic cone. They get out, remove the traffic cone, get back in their car and then they and the driverless car go on their way. Sounds alot easier than helping push a broken down human driven car out of the way.
- MSFT_Edging 3y agoFrom recent headlines, it sounds like people are protesting the fact their city is being used as an alpha testing site and causing a nuisance. I don't think its necessarily in protest of the technology in general, but the irresponsible way these things are let loose on the road without a person there to get it out of the way when it gridlocks. Its an issue that can be solved by spending relatively little money on a test driver's salary that they're purposefully avoiding to save money and avoid responsibility.
- Fricken 3y agoSelf driving cars are just another rent extraction scheme from billionaire venture capitalists.
- Animats 3y ago"Your Google account has been terminated due to a terms of service violation." Those cars do know about anything near them that talks WiFi or Bluetooth.
- mcguire 3y agoDoes anyone have good numbers for, say, deaths per mile driven in urban environments, and for the number of miles driven by driverless cars? The article says: "Both Cruise and Waymo say their vehicles are far safer than human drivers and compared to humans they've had relatively few incidents. They say they've driven millions of driverless miles without any human fatalities or life-threatening injuries." which is about all the detail I've seen since Tesla's sketchy press release a few years back. Here's the deal: California has 1.4 deaths per 100,000,000 vehicle miles traveled; "millions of miles" is a drop in the statistical bucket. But on the other hand, that's California overall while the autonomous vehicles are largely in urban areas, right? The article claims, between Cruise and Waymo, there are roughly 300 AVs. If they average 30mph, that's 9000 miles per hour or 80M miles per year. That would be about 1 expected death per year, assuming the California statistics. https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/state-by-state https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/state...
- throwawaylinux 3y ago30mph across the entire fleet, 24x7? I don't live in a city with them but that sounds optimistic. 30mph seems like a decent average in a big city when you're on the move. Add stops to recharge, pick and drop fares, maintenance, and down time between fares, I'd not be surprised if it was half that or less.
- culopatin 3y agoIn sf you rarely hit 30mph unless all you do is the highway and the bridges. Otherwise speed limit is often 25 and these cruise and way nos drive on the safe side, so their average is probably in the tens of mph
- oatmeal1 3y agoIntuitively I'd believe it. They are programmed to be very cautious around pedestrians and cyclists, and drive the speed limit.
- Legend2440 3y agoI don't think there's enough public data to make a good comparison on safety. Only the companies and presumably the NTSB have that data. As you mentioned, an apples-to-apples comparison is hard. The type of driving (urban vs freeway), the location, the weather conditions, even the times of day they drive could all bias accident rates.
- someonehere 3y agoAs much as I endure the spirit of these cars helping people, San Francisco is not the place to test this. I realize Cruise started in SF and they want that SF startup vibe for hiring, but SF was not designed for this. Test the cars elsewhere in suburbia and leave densely populated, narrow streets for later conquests. Larger cities with wider roads are better suited. Once the reputation of the cars being successful, it’ll work it’s way into denser areas like SF and NYC.
- 8f2ab37a-ed6c 3y agoSF has a hair on fire need for this sort of solution because practically no apartments come with parking spots, there’s nowhere to park even if you had a car, car break-ins are ubiquitous and public transportation is horrific unless you happen to live along a few convenient lines. Ergo Uber and now Cruise. You don’t need Cruise in the suburbs, everybody has a car and parking is convenient.
- Ekaros 3y agoOn other hand if the Cruise is located in SF it is entirely just not to externalise testing. If people don't like them they are free to go front of their office and protest.
- ManitobaForMe 3y ago[dead]
- acyou 3y agoArmed with a powerful media platform with extensive reach, media executives are building the blocks of hatred and division in the ongoing and escalating war between the people who will benefit from automation and the people who will suffer. If you're reading this, you're probably on the side of those benefiting from automation, at least in the short term. On a lighter note, I would love to see this technique used in a future Terminator or Robocop movie.
- Ekaros 3y agoCouldn't this be easily solved by adding articulated robotic arms to cars so they can remove any blocking obstacles?
- manarth 3y agoWhy stop at robotic arms? Perhaps a flipper on the bonnet to eject cones? A water-jet to discourage anything remaining in front? A spike or rotary saw for the more challenging obstacles? Oh wait, I'm thinking of Robot Wars. My bad.
- sriram_malhar 3y agoIt ain't AGI unless the cars exhibit road rage!
- pvaldes 3y agoI assume that gluing your crotch to the Mona Lisa stopped being funny after a while, by the unexpected blisters and the skin loss Welcome to the puppetocene, the age of remote controlled puppets that will be tricked to boycott its own industry for the price of a few dopamine rushes and 15 seconds of fame They probably think that taxes are paid by mythical creatures like the fairy of taxes or the plentyrich yeti so is not their own money what is being burnt in each sabotage party. The reality will hit them like a ton of bricks.
- efields 3y agoIf it harms nobody and gets people talking, that’s fine. They’re not blocking ambulances from getting to hospitals. They’re not interfering with existing rides. I’m all for this.
- softsound 3y agoIn a culture of overweight lonely youth lacking good public transportation and beautiful safe walkable cities, the future is at-cost privately owned driverless soulless cars and even more car focused ugly cities. I can understand why they protest. It will likely happen one way or another and could be good for some use cases but I'd rather find more community based methods that are better for the person and the environment. Soon you'll never need to see anyone for anything if not already. It will be easier to avoid the ugly. .... Good for the young folks to push back. I remember San Francisco as a scary place, the streets of the poor and homeless had long stretches of dark zombie like people waiting. Just waiting around. At night they would make mini markets casting out ratty clothes hoping someone might pay them or perhaps trade for a shirt or pair of pants found from who knows where, just piles and piles of clothes of no value but to I suppose those who could find it. People who took shelter in whatever was left of a decayed community. Even in my area, a safe uppity hotel while I visited this area for work, I saw them sleep in strange phone booths, barely realizing someone was there but for the light not getting through the door crack. The hidden people locked away. I wonder how many more I never noticed. And at night many floors up you could still hear sometimes someone cry for help echoing out. I'm not really a fan of the city, but there were a few cozy areas well lit with strings of lights and rich expensive meals with street sitting made to take up space. They wanted the streets for themselves. Plants added a cozy factor and so many more trees were found there and the feeling of peace with the people dining and drinking under the cloudy night quietly enjoying the evening. What a strange contrast. I had to get an uber driver for the bad areas and everyone was scared for me when I went walking by myself at night to go home on one of my trips. I still often would walk though, as perhaps a stupid act of defiance but I really wasn't all that far from my hotel. I remember forgetting a toothbrush once and finding them locked up at Walgreens and had to get help to purchase it. Prized item it was. One day we may even fear walking in the day. We don't know who lives by us, these unknown leftover Americans.
- resuresu 3y agoIm so sick of these bike nazis. Im sorry but not every town and city is designed so everyone can ride a bike 5 minutes from their house. Some of us live many miles from where we work or where the nearest store is, some of us are crippled or elderly so doing so would not be feasble anyway. As usual the modern day extremist protestor is all emotion and no logic.
- pipeline_peak 3y agoThis is awesome, but they need to go one step further. Spray paint these cars, some message that shows people they’re being used as Guinea pigs in the name of motor safety.
- t0bia_s 3y agoIn Prague, we have activists who flat tiers of big SUV's. Because driving and parking big SUV in city doesn't make sense, they say.