4 ms·

Being autonomous does not change the fact that a car weighs 1000kg and occupies about 10sqm, just to move a single 70kg person. Or even no one at all, since the

Being autonomous does not change the fact that a car weighs 1000kg and occupies about 10sqm, just to move a single 70kg person. Or even no one at all, since they are autonomous. It's a gigantic waste of space and energy. In this regard, it is in no way comparable to trains, buses etc.

badpun 3y ago
> a car weighs 1000kg and occupies about 10sqm, just to move a single 70kg person. > It's a gigantic waste of space and energy. So were horses and buggies before car was invented. Interesting, waste of neither space nor energy was not raised as an issue back then.
- cr3ative 3y ago
  I can almost guarantee it was raised by someone back then. That’s a strange claim to make. Even just dealing with the poo was a logistical nightmare for a city!
  - Xylakant 3y ago
    Indeed: > Just because all roads lead to Rome doesn’t mean you can get in — at least not on wheels. During Julius Caesar’s reign, daytime access to the Eternal City was restricted, with travelers required to hitch their carriages outside the city gates. https://www.sciencenews.org/article/ancient-rome-forbade-downtown-traffic-day https://www.sciencenews.org/article/ancient-rome-forbade-dow...
twoodfin 3y ago
If it’s truly a waste, producing no value, no one will pay for it. But obviously many, many people value things like - The time savings of direct, immediate, door-to-door transportation - Dedicated storage capacity - Configuration flexibility, e.g. children’s car seats, foldable seats, luggage racks - Style and comfort options - Privacy …and direct their dollars accordingly.
- OccamsMirror 3y ago
  Except there’s an obvious failure of the market when the true cost of something is not borne by the producer or the consumer. Negative externalities lead to an overproduction and overconsumption of goods or services because the market price does not reflect the true social costs. Which can have detrimental effects on society and the environment. Not to mention the misallocation of resources that one day we may well bitterly regret.
  - yodelshady 3y ago
    And you think correcting that failure will be harder when the consumer has zero personal investment (financial or emotional) in that thing?
  - oldnetguy 3y ago
    you mean like public transit?
  - twoodfin 3y ago
    Sure, pass a serious carbon tax.
- maest 3y ago
  People really enjoy not paying for externalities. Cars have utility but also disutility - a lot of the latter is not priced in.
- ehnto 3y ago
  The cost is not bourne entirely by the driver though, that is why it riles people up I think. Taxes subsidize all the infrastructure for cars, even if the taxee doesn't drive, yet it isn't a service for everyone. It also vastly degrades the usage of the space for everyone else. The fact thst the city stinks, is loud, hard to get around and real estate is more expensive can all be linked to impact of cars. I think people would hate on cars less if there was a fair focus on other infrastructure as well. We could have the best of both worlds. I love the freedom to drive but I would rather we all have freedom of movement with mass transit and cleaner, quieter cities.
Xylakant 3y ago
Just for a comparison of efficiency: The M10 Tram in Berlin runs every 5 minutes during daytime, each car with a capacity of around 300 passengers. That’s equivalent to roughly a kilometer of cars, parked end to end with no space in between.
- lotsoweiners 3y ago
  Cool. Does it pick me up at me house and keep others away from me? No? Then not interested in how often it runs.
- intr1nsic 3y ago
  Every 5 minutes seems inefficient. Does it run if only 1 person boards? 1km of cars is 1/9 the total length of the M10. Not following the argument here.
  - Xylakant 3y ago
    It’s usually pretty full in the M10. I don’t get the comparison with the total length of the track - you could compare with the length of a tram, which would be 50 meters.
ehnto 3y ago
More like 1700kg, trending heavier each year. Bigger is safer until everyone is the same size, pedestrians are literally losing that battle. Death tolls are up in city centres, some cities are considering taxing SUVs/high GMV commuters that enter the city.

badpun 3y ago

> a car weighs 1000kg and occupies about 10sqm, just to move a single 70kg person. > It's a gigantic waste of space and energy. So were horses and buggies before car was invented. Interesting, waste of neither space nor energy was not raised as an issue back then.

cr3ative 3y ago
I can almost guarantee it was raised by someone back then. That’s a strange claim to make. Even just dealing with the poo was a logistical nightmare for a city!
- Xylakant 3y ago
  Indeed: > Just because all roads lead to Rome doesn’t mean you can get in — at least not on wheels. During Julius Caesar’s reign, daytime access to the Eternal City was restricted, with travelers required to hitch their carriages outside the city gates. https://www.sciencenews.org/article/ancient-rome-forbade-downtown-traffic-day https://www.sciencenews.org/article/ancient-rome-forbade-dow...

twoodfin 3y ago

If it’s truly a waste, producing no value, no one will pay for it. But obviously many, many people value things like - The time savings of direct, immediate, door-to-door transportation - Dedicated storage capacity - Configuration flexibility, e.g. children’s car seats, foldable seats, luggage racks - Style and comfort options - Privacy …and direct their dollars accordingly.

OccamsMirror 3y ago
Except there’s an obvious failure of the market when the true cost of something is not borne by the producer or the consumer. Negative externalities lead to an overproduction and overconsumption of goods or services because the market price does not reflect the true social costs. Which can have detrimental effects on society and the environment. Not to mention the misallocation of resources that one day we may well bitterly regret.
- yodelshady 3y ago
  And you think correcting that failure will be harder when the consumer has zero personal investment (financial or emotional) in that thing?
- oldnetguy 3y ago
  you mean like public transit?
- twoodfin 3y ago
  Sure, pass a serious carbon tax.
maest 3y ago
People really enjoy not paying for externalities. Cars have utility but also disutility - a lot of the latter is not priced in.
ehnto 3y ago
The cost is not bourne entirely by the driver though, that is why it riles people up I think. Taxes subsidize all the infrastructure for cars, even if the taxee doesn't drive, yet it isn't a service for everyone. It also vastly degrades the usage of the space for everyone else. The fact thst the city stinks, is loud, hard to get around and real estate is more expensive can all be linked to impact of cars. I think people would hate on cars less if there was a fair focus on other infrastructure as well. We could have the best of both worlds. I love the freedom to drive but I would rather we all have freedom of movement with mass transit and cleaner, quieter cities.

Xylakant 3y ago

Just for a comparison of efficiency: The M10 Tram in Berlin runs every 5 minutes during daytime, each car with a capacity of around 300 passengers. That’s equivalent to roughly a kilometer of cars, parked end to end with no space in between.

lotsoweiners 3y ago
Cool. Does it pick me up at me house and keep others away from me? No? Then not interested in how often it runs.
intr1nsic 3y ago
Every 5 minutes seems inefficient. Does it run if only 1 person boards? 1km of cars is 1/9 the total length of the M10. Not following the argument here.
- Xylakant 3y ago
  It’s usually pretty full in the M10. I don’t get the comparison with the total length of the track - you could compare with the length of a tram, which would be 50 meters.

ehnto 3y ago

More like 1700kg, trending heavier each year. Bigger is safer until everyone is the same size, pedestrians are literally losing that battle. Death tolls are up in city centres, some cities are considering taxing SUVs/high GMV commuters that enter the city.