3 ms·

As much as I was glad to see lighting become more efficient, as someone who enjoys seeing the night sky I was worried what the impact of virtually free lighting

As much as I was glad to see lighting become more efficient, as someone who enjoys seeing the night sky I was worried what the impact of virtually free lighting would be. And indeed, at least in rural Ireland the proliferation of extremely bright uplights which are on all night has not been great for seeing the milky way. Similarly, I worry that if we ever _do_ get fully self-driving EV's it will only serve to make it comfortable to commute from, say, Yosemite to Mountain View - and who wouldn't want that? Yet I rarely see increased congestion come up in discussions about FSD.

borissk 3y ago
Interesting question. Beijing has huge problems with traffic jams and the CCP has has taken some extreme measures to limit the number of cars there. E.g. they practically don't issue registration numbers for ICE vehicles and there's a queue for EV registration numbers, that currently goes to 2035 (if you join the queue now you'll get a reg number in 2035). Some cities with heavy traffic in Europe and China have implemented rules, like only cars with even registration numbers are allowed to drive on Mondays.
- et-al 3y ago
  In Beijing, the wealthy folks get around this rule by owning two cars.
  - NeoTar 3y ago
    When this was applied in some European city (Paris?) there was a joke - "The rich got around this by using two cars. The poor got around it by using two number-plates".
Sharlin 3y ago
Lighting is simply something that must be regulated, just like everything else that has negative externalities. It’s not that different from noise or other kinds of pollution.
- CalRobert 3y ago
  Certainly, though you'd get laughed at complaining to an Irish council about lighting. Other places are better.
  - Sharlin 3y ago
    Yeah, it’s definitely something that’s only now starting to get recognized as a potential problem.
hotnfresh 3y ago
Secondary effects from widespread automobile ownership already removed most of its benefit for most people (typically they're net-negative, in fact) for day-to-day activities. Full self-driving would at least put normal people on similar footing to the few who still gain significant advantage from cars (mostly people who can pay someone else to drive them everywhere). Buuuuut you're right that total time in cars might increase, making things overall worse—you're not exactly free to do anything when you're in a car, even as a passenger. ("Seems impossible, how's that work?" take commuting time and time worked to pay for car, insurance, fuel, and maintenance. Compare worked-time it takes to pay for equivalents on a bicycle, plus bicycle commute time if you removed all the space you drive past that exists only or mainly because of cars [which is... a whole lot when you start analyzing it]. Do same for e.g. the grocery store and other places you regularly visit. You'll probably find that most people in your city—including, perhaps, you—must be losing time to their car, and likely a lot of it, when the point was to get places faster, i.e. to save time. Cars in an environment where lots of people own cars end up being beneficial mainly for the disabled and people who don't have to drive themselves, so can partially reclaim that time for other activities, i.e. the rich. The analysis just gets more lopsided the more complete you try to make it—added healthcare costs, more dedicated time spent exercising to make up for inactivity due to cars, infrastructure costs, et c, there's a lot more time and money that can plausibly be put under the "cost of widespread car ownership" column. And yes, I stole this analysis from Illich—I ran the numbers because it seemed crazy, but he's totally right)
- fragmede 3y ago
  > you're not exactly free to do anything when you're in a car, even as a passenger. Sure, not anything but if I can be a passenger in the back seat with a driver that's not going to crash, so I don't need to be a second set of eyes for them, or stay awake to help keep them awake, and I can watch a movie or code on my laptop with tethering to my phone, or just take a nap, I could probably put up with a multi-hour commute and I'm sure I'm not the only one.
api 3y ago
Along similar lines I've been predicting that AI is going to increase demand for knowledge work. It may decrease demand for certain types of knowledge work, but the overall volume will increase.
sorokod 3y ago
Yet I rarely see increased congestion come up in discussions about FSD It is very simple, companies invested in EV, FSD, etc. are doing so to make a profit from EV, FSD, etc. How those affect humanity is not their concern.
aaron695 3y ago
[dead]

borissk 3y ago

Interesting question. Beijing has huge problems with traffic jams and the CCP has has taken some extreme measures to limit the number of cars there. E.g. they practically don't issue registration numbers for ICE vehicles and there's a queue for EV registration numbers, that currently goes to 2035 (if you join the queue now you'll get a reg number in 2035). Some cities with heavy traffic in Europe and China have implemented rules, like only cars with even registration numbers are allowed to drive on Mondays.

et-al 3y ago
In Beijing, the wealthy folks get around this rule by owning two cars.
- NeoTar 3y ago
  When this was applied in some European city (Paris?) there was a joke - "The rich got around this by using two cars. The poor got around it by using two number-plates".

Sharlin 3y ago

Lighting is simply something that must be regulated, just like everything else that has negative externalities. It’s not that different from noise or other kinds of pollution.

CalRobert 3y ago
Certainly, though you'd get laughed at complaining to an Irish council about lighting. Other places are better.
- Sharlin 3y ago
  Yeah, it’s definitely something that’s only now starting to get recognized as a potential problem.

hotnfresh 3y ago

Secondary effects from widespread automobile ownership already removed most of its benefit for most people (typically they're net-negative, in fact) for day-to-day activities. Full self-driving would at least put normal people on similar footing to the few who still gain significant advantage from cars (mostly people who can pay someone else to drive them everywhere). Buuuuut you're right that total time in cars might increase, making things overall worse—you're not exactly free to do anything when you're in a car, even as a passenger. ("Seems impossible, how's that work?" take commuting time and time worked to pay for car, insurance, fuel, and maintenance. Compare worked-time it takes to pay for equivalents on a bicycle, plus bicycle commute time if you removed all the space you drive past that exists only or mainly because of cars [which is... a whole lot when you start analyzing it]. Do same for e.g. the grocery store and other places you regularly visit. You'll probably find that most people in your city—including, perhaps, you—must be losing time to their car, and likely a lot of it, when the point was to get places faster, i.e. to save time. Cars in an environment where lots of people own cars end up being beneficial mainly for the disabled and people who don't have to drive themselves, so can partially reclaim that time for other activities, i.e. the rich. The analysis just gets more lopsided the more complete you try to make it—added healthcare costs, more dedicated time spent exercising to make up for inactivity due to cars, infrastructure costs, et c, there's a lot more time and money that can plausibly be put under the "cost of widespread car ownership" column. And yes, I stole this analysis from Illich—I ran the numbers because it seemed crazy, but he's totally right)

fragmede 3y ago
> you're not exactly free to do anything when you're in a car, even as a passenger. Sure, not anything but if I can be a passenger in the back seat with a driver that's not going to crash, so I don't need to be a second set of eyes for them, or stay awake to help keep them awake, and I can watch a movie or code on my laptop with tethering to my phone, or just take a nap, I could probably put up with a multi-hour commute and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

api 3y ago

Along similar lines I've been predicting that AI is going to increase demand for knowledge work. It may decrease demand for certain types of knowledge work, but the overall volume will increase.

sorokod 3y ago

Yet I rarely see increased congestion come up in discussions about FSD It is very simple, companies invested in EV, FSD, etc. are doing so to make a profit from EV, FSD, etc. How those affect humanity is not their concern.

aaron695 3y ago

[dead]