4 ms·

> those beautiful times when people actually cared and believed the future will be better. David Graeber has written eloquently about this https://davidgraebe

> those beautiful times when people actually cared and believed the future will be better. David Graeber has written eloquently about this https://davidgraeber.org/articles/of-flying-cars-and-the-declining-rate-of-profit/ https://davidgraeber.org/articles/of-flying-cars-and-the-dec...

Kuinox 2y ago
Flying car is simply a bad idea, thats why there is none.
- js8 2y ago
  Car (for personal transport) is also a bad idea, yet there is plenty of them.
  - Kuinox 2y ago
    Yes, it's taking ages in order to get ride of thoses in of Paris. You need to not hurt thoses who are brainwashed by cars and keep taking it despite having one of the best public transit in the world.
    - baud147258 2y ago
      I'm not sure Paris has one of the best public transit in the world or maybe that's just an indicative of the sorry state of public transit worldwide. I mean I wouldn't call world-class a system where just a single failure easily strands 1 million people halfway to their destination and where trains are delayed and cancelled routinely, often without information given to passengers. I'm in favor of more public transportation, but if you think people use car willingly in and around Paris, I don't think you've tried it; it's so bad that only people with no viable choice will use a car. Or maybe you could explain (for example) how my sister in law was supposed to carry her two baby kids to the daycare using an overcrowded metro (and bonus, through stations without working elevators) or how my brother was supposed to carry the equipment he was using to constructions sites he was working. And then you've got all the places where taking a car is a 30 min trip vs 2 hours by bus or public transportation (thankfully the Grand Paris initiatives are helping a lot there). For now, removing cars in Paris just push them around the city, because the public transportation network isn't ready.
      - Kuinox 2y ago
        For a lot of destination you can take 2-3 differentes routes. The rest of your comment try to justify car usage by taking less than 5% of the transit in the city, when there is already exception or infrastructures made for the scenario you described (except elevators and accessibility, thats a big issur in paris intra-muros). Yes, there are a lot of people that use the car when they can not use it, thats still most of the car traffic.
        baud147258 2y ago
        > Yes, there are a lot of people that use the car when they can not use it, thats still most of the car traffic. so, do you have any data to back up that assertion? (I won't claim that I have any favorable to my argument, just the observation that driving in and Paris around Paris is pretty bad) > For a lot of destination you can take 2-3 differentes routes. most alternative routes usually take longer and end up congested whenever the main route is having issues.
        Kuinox 2y ago
        The average is still 1.3 person per car, if you get outside a little you will see tons of single person in cars, and not in minitruck like artisans. https://www.paris.fr/pages/le-bilan-des-deplacements-a-paris-en-2022-24072 https://www.paris.fr/pages/le-bilan-des-deplacements-a-paris... Indicate 13% of the traffic is for utilitary vehicule. This number include people taking their utilitary vehicule for personal reason. 50% is for personal vehicules. Also, why were you driving around Paris ? > most alternative routes usually take longer It depends.
        baud147258 2y ago
        But I don't see anything in the document that shows that people are using personal vehicles for deplacements they could have easily been made with public transportation. Which was your original point that I disagreeing with: people aren't 'brainwashed by cars', but rather can't practically use another way. Also, according to one of the linked pdf, cars in Paris are barely for Paris-Paris movement, but more for Paris-suburbs, which is still the biggest weakness of the public transportation network.
    - nradov 2y ago
      How do people get around Paris when transit employees don't feel like working that day?
      - TeMPOraL 2y ago
        They don't, because that would be the whole point of a total shutdown in a coordinated, all-modes transit employees strike. Ask people in London, they have that on a semi-regular basis. Otherwise, there is no such thing as "transit employees not feeling like working" - thanks to the magic of economy holding a metaphorical gun to the heads of most people. You work whether you feel like it or not.
      - Kuinox 2y ago
        There are multiple route to get from point A to B. For example, from Versailles to Invalides, you can take: RER C then Metro 8. Or TER N then i can choose from two different metro line at Montparnasse Or TER U then RER A. There is also buses, bus since the rail is faster, I never take it. In case of strike the network is never fully down, people that can remote work do it, so there is a lot less of people transiting. On the biggest strike you can loose an hour or two while commuting, for small strike, it will get more crowded.
- sneak 2y ago
  I disagree entirely. Single person octocopters running autonomously would be awesome.
  - Kuinox 2y ago
    Catastrophical failure would be way worse. Flying is less energy efficient. You need to find cheaper and clean energy source. You need to find a tech that allow to fly quietly. Forcing to make people walk more is better for the society as a whole.
    - mikro2nd 2y ago
      I'm forced to disagree. Catastrophic failure would be a feature not a bug. "Natural selection against stupidity."
      - eru 2y ago
        Alas, that doesn't really work, if catastrophic failure also harms innocent bystanders.
      - Kuinox 2y ago
        "Worse" was not for people in the vehicle but the people below. After car forced us to be aware of our surrounding when walking, flying car would force us to be aware of the sky too.
        nradov 2y ago
        Humans have always needed to be aware of their surroundings. Plenty of pedestrians were hit by horse-drawn vehicles before cars were even invented.
        MichaelZuo 2y ago
        How can they be aware of something so high up it appears smaller than the average pigeon?
- pantalaimon 2y ago
  Flying cars just look cool in movies and immediately take the scene to the future. Movies don't need to concern themselves with practicality too much.
  - Kuinox 2y ago
    Exactly why the cybertruck should never have been something more than a concept car.
    - faggotbreath 2y ago
      [dead]
bradley13 2y ago
Interesting article, but jeezum, he could have said the same thing with 1/10 the words. You can skip entire paragraphs and mess nothing. tl;dr: it all leads to this conclusion: replace "capitalism [with a system that] is based on a far more egalitarian distribution of wealth and power:.
- drooby 2y ago
  That's Graeber for you. "Bullshit Jobs" should have also remained a blog post.

Kuinox 2y ago

Flying car is simply a bad idea, thats why there is none.

js8 2y ago
Car (for personal transport) is also a bad idea, yet there is plenty of them.
- Kuinox 2y ago
  Yes, it's taking ages in order to get ride of thoses in of Paris. You need to not hurt thoses who are brainwashed by cars and keep taking it despite having one of the best public transit in the world.
  - baud147258 2y ago
    I'm not sure Paris has one of the best public transit in the world or maybe that's just an indicative of the sorry state of public transit worldwide. I mean I wouldn't call world-class a system where just a single failure easily strands 1 million people halfway to their destination and where trains are delayed and cancelled routinely, often without information given to passengers. I'm in favor of more public transportation, but if you think people use car willingly in and around Paris, I don't think you've tried it; it's so bad that only people with no viable choice will use a car. Or maybe you could explain (for example) how my sister in law was supposed to carry her two baby kids to the daycare using an overcrowded metro (and bonus, through stations without working elevators) or how my brother was supposed to carry the equipment he was using to constructions sites he was working. And then you've got all the places where taking a car is a 30 min trip vs 2 hours by bus or public transportation (thankfully the Grand Paris initiatives are helping a lot there). For now, removing cars in Paris just push them around the city, because the public transportation network isn't ready.
    - Kuinox 2y ago
      For a lot of destination you can take 2-3 differentes routes. The rest of your comment try to justify car usage by taking less than 5% of the transit in the city, when there is already exception or infrastructures made for the scenario you described (except elevators and accessibility, thats a big issur in paris intra-muros). Yes, there are a lot of people that use the car when they can not use it, thats still most of the car traffic.
      - baud147258 2y ago
        > Yes, there are a lot of people that use the car when they can not use it, thats still most of the car traffic. so, do you have any data to back up that assertion? (I won't claim that I have any favorable to my argument, just the observation that driving in and Paris around Paris is pretty bad) > For a lot of destination you can take 2-3 differentes routes. most alternative routes usually take longer and end up congested whenever the main route is having issues.
        Kuinox 2y ago
        The average is still 1.3 person per car, if you get outside a little you will see tons of single person in cars, and not in minitruck like artisans. https://www.paris.fr/pages/le-bilan-des-deplacements-a-paris-en-2022-24072 https://www.paris.fr/pages/le-bilan-des-deplacements-a-paris... Indicate 13% of the traffic is for utilitary vehicule. This number include people taking their utilitary vehicule for personal reason. 50% is for personal vehicules. Also, why were you driving around Paris ? > most alternative routes usually take longer It depends.
        baud147258 2y ago
        But I don't see anything in the document that shows that people are using personal vehicles for deplacements they could have easily been made with public transportation. Which was your original point that I disagreeing with: people aren't 'brainwashed by cars', but rather can't practically use another way. Also, according to one of the linked pdf, cars in Paris are barely for Paris-Paris movement, but more for Paris-suburbs, which is still the biggest weakness of the public transportation network.
  - nradov 2y ago
    How do people get around Paris when transit employees don't feel like working that day?
    - TeMPOraL 2y ago
      They don't, because that would be the whole point of a total shutdown in a coordinated, all-modes transit employees strike. Ask people in London, they have that on a semi-regular basis. Otherwise, there is no such thing as "transit employees not feeling like working" - thanks to the magic of economy holding a metaphorical gun to the heads of most people. You work whether you feel like it or not.
    - Kuinox 2y ago
      There are multiple route to get from point A to B. For example, from Versailles to Invalides, you can take: RER C then Metro 8. Or TER N then i can choose from two different metro line at Montparnasse Or TER U then RER A. There is also buses, bus since the rail is faster, I never take it. In case of strike the network is never fully down, people that can remote work do it, so there is a lot less of people transiting. On the biggest strike you can loose an hour or two while commuting, for small strike, it will get more crowded.
sneak 2y ago
I disagree entirely. Single person octocopters running autonomously would be awesome.
- Kuinox 2y ago
  Catastrophical failure would be way worse. Flying is less energy efficient. You need to find cheaper and clean energy source. You need to find a tech that allow to fly quietly. Forcing to make people walk more is better for the society as a whole.
  - mikro2nd 2y ago
    I'm forced to disagree. Catastrophic failure would be a feature not a bug. "Natural selection against stupidity."
    - eru 2y ago
      Alas, that doesn't really work, if catastrophic failure also harms innocent bystanders.
    - Kuinox 2y ago
      "Worse" was not for people in the vehicle but the people below. After car forced us to be aware of our surrounding when walking, flying car would force us to be aware of the sky too.
      - nradov 2y ago
        Humans have always needed to be aware of their surroundings. Plenty of pedestrians were hit by horse-drawn vehicles before cars were even invented.
        MichaelZuo 2y ago
        How can they be aware of something so high up it appears smaller than the average pigeon?
pantalaimon 2y ago
Flying cars just look cool in movies and immediately take the scene to the future. Movies don't need to concern themselves with practicality too much.
- Kuinox 2y ago
  Exactly why the cybertruck should never have been something more than a concept car.
  - faggotbreath 2y ago
    [dead]

bradley13 2y ago

Interesting article, but jeezum, he could have said the same thing with 1/10 the words. You can skip entire paragraphs and mess nothing. tl;dr: it all leads to this conclusion: replace "capitalism [with a system that] is based on a far more egalitarian distribution of wealth and power:.

drooby 2y ago
That's Graeber for you. "Bullshit Jobs" should have also remained a blog post.