Hear me out. I live in San Francisco, Chicago before that, and view modern cars like this:
· More surveillance than an actual surveillance camera · Require hyper-KYC · Are the most common point of contact between people and law enforcement · Are part of the fiat debt trap with loans · Require a perpetual expenditure (capex) of resources like mining with none of the benefits, wether it's gas, repairs, insurance, washing, parking, or just theta · Swell city budgets, from more police to annual repairs · Are increasingly dependent on a subscription-based model for features, which makes me almost violent
I mean, where's the freedom that the Ultimate Driving Machine is selling me? Maybe I'm built too Ford Tough. Of course none of this applies if you live outside the city, but for the major population center dwellers, why not allocate the streets to restaurants for al fresco dining instead of Tesla's four-wheeled spyware? Or build parks. Allow gyms to use the space in the mornings, endless farmer's markets, gardens, micro-trans, bars, general event space, whatever. Return it to small businesses, communities, churches.
It's social. It's active. It's healthy. That seems like the new thinking, new possibility Hyundai always talks about.
This isn't like the pedestrian scourge I've noticed. Let me explain: one of my biggest complaints in the cities I've domiciled is that they've made a terrible mistake trying to combat homelessness by removing all the benches and areas to sit. Now when you walk about the city, you feel rushed, there's no place to sit, you're funneled into businesses or in and out of parks, thusly, you walk shorter distances, stay indoors more, etc. It's bullshit, and frankly I'm not sure why it hasn't been brought up in cultural discussions. Has it curtailed homelessness? No. In fact, they should've done the exact opposite, and built significantly more loiter space.
Humans need that.
I dumped my car during the pandemic. Sold it for about as much as I bought if for, then bought bitcoin, and an e-bike. This bike gets 70 miles per charge, charges in under an hour, goes 35mph, parks anywhere, weighs 45lbs, and costs about $50 total in yearly upkeep. I get to work and back in less time which makes me more productive, I'm healthier, and have more disposable income as a result. Micro-trans (e-bikes, scooters, etc) is exploding. A parabola of investment, consumers, and city pathway allocation is meeting its demands. I just feel that getting rid of cars throughout large blocks of a city is a boon. It's more efficient in all ways contending, proffers a better quality of life, reduces healthcare costs, brings communities closer and so on. I just don't see Tesla's self-burning car software with built in NSA sensors based on a subscription model for features (fuck I hate these), and subsidized by taxpayers playing a role in future city affordances.
I'd like to hear some rebuttals. Satoshis for hi-rez replies, as always.
never thought of it this way. just thought they were restricting freedom. ur arguing the opposite. that it promotes freedom
reply
You make some good points I hadn’t considered before.
90% or more of my car usage is on weekend road trips or adventures. Unfortunately those use cases aren’t served well by trains or planes, and probably never will be.
I agree with all your critiques of car-ownership in cities though, it’s probably not necessary and has a lot of bad consequences for people.
Cities designed for cars tend to be uglier than cities designed for people too.
reply
Great reply. Like that last point too.
reply
I planned my trip according to where the train went. I just looked up the map and went as far north as the train would go in one go. It was a great time. I ended up in a fishing town for lack of a better term that had alot of tourism during the summer. Since i came in January it was off season very peaceful and cheap! It was a great time. No car needed! Next time im going west just for the heck of it
reply
The fact that modern cars have a shit ton of state overhead doesn’t mean we should give up on personal transportation. It means we should take the state out of the car.
I use public transportation when it matches my schedule and other needs. But I really like being able to go where I want when I want, alone or with a few others.
Personally, I’m hoping that hydrogen based fuels eventually win out for portable, mobile energy needs. Not holding my breath though. Government sponsored research and subsidies in this area always loses out to solar and wind and any other solution that helps bind people to a centrally controlled grid.
reply
The fact that modern cars have a shit ton of state overhead doesn’t mean we should give up on personal transportation.
Does OP even argue that? Maybe I missed it. His personal solution was a bike ie personal transportation.
reply
I left big city 11 years ago for a simple rural life. And I never regret it. My life improved enormously. I sold also my car to buy more bitcoins. Also growing my own vegetables and chickens. Now building myself a citadel deep into the mountains. To retire, for good, forever.
But I will never go back to a big city. Even now, when I have to make short trips to a nearby city, I could not stay more than few hours there. Unsupportable.
reply
deleted by author
reply
You can do it too. Don't think it wasn't hard for me to leave the big city.
The hardest part was to take the decision, not how to do it. Because each one of us have his own worries and preconceptions etc.
It's all in our bloated mind. The city life is damaging our brain in many ways. But once I said: fuck it, let's do it, and never look back... all comes easy.
Don't worry, be happy. Smile, tomorrow will be worse.
With these 2 metas, I go forward and nothing will stop me. Leave your worries behind, is the first hard step.
reply
Saving cost and expenses is what I love the most about this write up. Most people like getting to work faster hence the need for a car as time is available and they might not live close to where they work. Even if you have time to make it to work via bus, bike or train, they are some responsibilities still out there to fulfil before doing so. After which you are tired and the energy to take the aforementioned means of transportation is out of the way.
reply
Only fools live in cities anyways.
reply
They're necessary, otherwise the entire country would be a giant suburb, and the decreased density would drive the costs of logistics up and productivity down. But I agree there are significant benefits to country life and remote work at large.
reply
I think people are afraid of e-cars because the way it going is that soon we will have a self driving car as well. Self driving car isn’t technically owned by you. It will most likely be connected to a company which means it’s “centralized” and government could take control of it or anyone who can hack can as well. There’s nothing more decentralized like a good old diesel/gas car. Also, there isn’t enough lithium in the world to let everyone have an electric cars which means people with more privilege and money will be able to afford/obtain them. The sales of cars will be even more regulated. Sure the ebikes and escooters are cool and sure some cities in the world have good weather to allow this all year round but any real disaster happens you will be a fish in a barrel. My impression is that most bitcoiners are anti-government to a degree. So, in bigger picture, carless city a no bueno
reply
dude im so glad other topics are making it into stacker.news. I have been a long time subscriber of r/fuckcars and have lived in texas for last 6 years. Cars are horrible they literally ruin communities and destroy the environment. Like imagine a city with a literal 70 mile an hour highway running down the middle and need to walk 1 hour to cross that highway because each "texas uturn" is extremely dangerous for pedestrians and is like half a mile apart.
reply
New cars are full of IoT crap and I'm gonna keep my old one for as long as I can. Wouldn't be surprised if people start paying a premium for cars without spyware.
I too would love to see more walkable areas, reliable transportation, and dense housing in the US. Not everyone needs expensive single family homes, but apparently it isn't easy to re-zone land—zoning laws are a huge part of the shitshow of unaffordable housing in the US. I've considered moving closer to the city so I won't have to drive all of the time. Driving can be exhausting sometimes
Most of the bitcoiners I've spoken to have a more urbanist mindset, so I wouldn't say they're against carless cities. In fact, I've come to find that bitcoiners mostly have little in common with one another
reply
I've lived in Oslo for a while and I only used my car then to travel to my home in Sweden on the weekends. Using the car in town was out of question. I hate driving in cities. While in Oslo, I got by using my feet and public transport. Also grew up in a smaller city. I see no problem banning cars in cities; provided that public transport is good, e-bikes are available for rental and there are good parking lots on the outskirts of town for visitors - of course with public transport into town centre from these parkings lots.
I now live 20 km from the nearest town and basically need a car due to non-existent public transport (10 km to nearest bus stop). I am putting up a solar charing station for my upcoming electric car though, and intend to get an e-bike to use when the weather allows for it. So I'm hoping to be 100 % off-grid transporting very soon. Here in Sweden on-grid electricity is taxed 50 % or higher, so I also see this as an investment keeping money from the government - which fails to deliver the services it should.
reply
I think it's about opposition to a centralized authoritarian decree for how people should act and organize.
There is a real possibility that if the state stopped subsidizing car usage, through government roads and parking requirements for businesses and residences, that cities would become much more oriented around pedestrians.
I saw an estimate years ago that street side parking costs more than the entire welfare system, through lost opportunities.
We should oppose the status quo pro car measures and progressive anti-car measures for the same reasons.
reply
Hi-rez. Based.
reply
Build your new city however you want, if people like it they will move there. But you can't mandate or restrict other's choices.
reply
Yes but I could argue oppositely and say when a city razes land and builds a road, it's mandating something, and restricting choices to a very specific activity—driving. Which is only useable if you own a car. You also pay for this with taxes. They'll argue it has corollary benefits for everybody, like the gov't does when it seizes property for roads via eminent domain. I'm just looking for the solution that costs the least and benefits the most.
reply
City planning is a political issue, and most bitcoiners will agree with something Ron Paul has coined as "Volunteerism"
When you start "looking for better solutions" - this is a form of authoritarianism.
You cannot mandate that other people live a certain way because it would be "better" (objectively or otherwise)
Cities exist the way that they do because they are initially built up through volunteerism, a community of people building out their lives. The addition of local governments and city utilities "making things better" creates the unfortunate eventuality of eminent domain construction actions.
I think the ultimate form of this way of thinking is currently being championed by the mega-city projects of Saudi-Arabia, let's wait and see how it works out for them.
reply
Makes total sense. No cars needed in the gulags, oops I mean cities.
reply
Cheeky bastard.
reply
I've been hearing this topic come up a bunch. Alex Gladstein on twitter I think has discussed this and he seems very anti- any state's move to ban gas cars and go car-less in metro areas.
reply
I do like Gladstein
reply
deleted by author
reply
High quality thread. Here's a zap.
Sold my car. I work less than 1km from my job. 🙂 no regrets
reply
I hear you.
But I think that the issues you mention, particularly those related with surveillance, are not issues created by cars. They are issues created by cities.
Many years ago, a coworker of mine said that the more concentrated people are, the less freedom you have. I didn’t understand him back then, but now I do. The surveillance in cities is going to get more intense, whether you own a vehicle or not. Facial recognition cameras, cashless payments… Heck, last summer I went visit my hometown (after having been away 3.5 years thanks to the “pandemic”) and I found out that in order to open the garbage dumpsters you now need an NFC card or an app linked to your household address. Go figure! The surveillance is coming fast, even if not related with cars.
reply
I own a e-scooter and a car, and I still hate these e-scooters on road.
Every time I see one of them I feel very frustrated.
they LOVE dashing through pedestrian lane and roads. Some drive on roads, getting to the front when there's red light and proceed to hog down the entire lane, forcing cars to take risk just to overtake them.
Even in dedicated bike lane, I keep seeing a lot driving on pedestrian lane and actually saw one almost crashing into a child just yesterday.
They don't take driving test, they have very poor sense of awareness, they make turning on normal road quite a bit riskier.
They simply cannot replace my car, which I use to visit fds and families living in the suburb, nor can they carry the load.
I honestly don't think what you are asking would become like, look at taiwan and vietnam if you want to see what a road filled with bikes (eg motorbikes) look like. They park their bikes in pedestrian lane, so they drive from there to get into the main road very often. I rarely feel safe walking in Taiwan because motorbikes would be driving past me all the time, and the amount of packed bikers is a horrible sight.
reply
Vietnam is amazing. Minimal gridlock and high mobility, due to lower requirements for purchase, hire, cost, licences. Safety is an issue, deaths are statistically high. But you know, with greater freedom comes greater responsibility.
As far as electric vehicles go, it has its own issues, and can empathize with parking being problematic to pedestrians but I think that's an area that would be easier to police. Over-policing restricts freedom.
I suppose, ideally, you want to encourage all forms of transport. As a pedestrian, I don't feel safe crossing multi-lane roads with any powered-vehicle! I get your point but we need vehicles. Affordable and reliable. I used Grab motorbikes to pick me up from airports. Never had a single problem.
In other countries, taxis used to be okay (as public companies) now it's just a hassle to hail one and not competitively priced.
reply
I travel in SEA region a lot, personally it was never comfortable driving or sitting in ride or even walking in Philippines and Vietnam.
There is a huge lack of driving manner, no turn signal for making a turn/parking.
I myself got into a small traffic accidents even in China where it's quite a fair bit better, the driver didn't give way and had a bump.
But what I dislike the most is where there are too many ebikes/motorcycle driving up onto pedestrian way to park and exit parking especially because the population density is so high
reply
Yeah, I do to. Sure there's a trade off but I think it's unique to each location and driver/rider/pedestrian sensibilities are a very local thing.
I had a friend who was hit by a food delivery driver on an e-bike while walking along an alley way. She was born in the country it happened in. So, I do get your point.
reply
Mentioning PRC, I remember cities littered with heaps of public share bikes too. That was the country my friend got whacked from the scooter coming from behind.
reply
China had so much shared bikes it was pretty crazy, I actually walked past one of these dump. https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2018/03/bike-share-oversupply-in-china-huge-piles-of-abandoned-and-broken-bicycles/556268/
reply
Jeez. They should recycle all that scrap into mining rigs
reply
I love that Ebikes have also become more mainstream.
reply
Cars have a lot of independent mobility. Especially lightweight diesels. Their per km cost is way lower than gasoline let alone less efficient electric. And their production cost versus total lifespan is also quite in favour of durable diesel high compression piston engines.
Eliminating useful things is retarded. Keeping them because of scenarios that never happen is also retarded.
I also avoid car ownership and piloting because reduces exposure to potentially lethal contact with individuals who have the ability to get immunity from their mistakes that cost you your life, or worse, that also of your family.
I would think that probably the 20th century city with about 1 car per 4 individuals is not worth the trouble. It might be more like 1:8 or 1:16.
I'd rather keep the car if the risk was that high I might need to be able to suddenly relocate 1000km in less than a day. Otherwise, yes, better to shift more transport duties to professionals.
Just keep in mind that you may not have been involved in a disaster where confusion and fear lead to terrible behaviour from marginal individuals. In those situations, everyone hopes they have a bro with a pickup and a jerry can in the back.
Cost is not everything. Risk matters equally. Risk is just harder to evaluate. Ideal is that everyone works in a shop under their house and doesn't commute. Humans don't like change. It is a testament to the vulnerability baked into our epigenetics by our ancestors that, yes, probably 1 car 4 humans is a pretty good ratio.
reply
This is a great example of the mess that fiat incentives create. Buying houses to reduce tax. Buying cars to cash in on some car related subsidy. Making bets instead of saving money.
reply
Hi-rez. Vey interesting point about the car/person ratio not being worth it. That's something to think about too
reply
Cars have become a racket for the state i wish they were not. But women dont care. If you dont have a car you are not interesting. Its that simple.
reply
Cold hearted bitch would also ditch you if you lost an arm or had a nasty spill with some very hot liquid on your face.
Attaching your self worth to impermanent things creates unhappiness in the long term.
reply
LOL there is that.
reply
I might try that as a pickup line. "Would you date a guy without a car?" what if she says no, she would seem superficial and shallow. She has to say yes! haha :|
reply
lol good luck with that
reply
no rebuttals, I agree with you.
teslas are death traps. i used to live in SF and while i had a muni pass, i walked most places, bussed or barted or otherwise, or rode my bicycle on occasion.
modern cars are surveillance devices and they suck real bad.
driverless cars are even worse. plus they are full on retard when it comes to actually handling cities, and the complex plethora of things they're not programmed for.
i could go on, but i'll stop here :)
reply
The loudest bitcoiners pick the weirdest shit to rally against. I also sold my car at the start of the pandemic and have been happy with it. I’m in SF and some of the roads that ditched cars have been a massive improvement in terms of both vehicle and foot traffic. Dunno if SF could ever go “full carless”, but I appreciate when cities pay more attention to transit. Adding more lanes of freeway isn’t a solution to moving more people, increasing the density of transport is.
reply
Can you list any positive point for modern cars?
reply
Well apparently people think that a nice one will get strangers to sleep with you. I had a nice one and can't say this was my experience. But look, if it's parked behind you in your dating profile pics, it might attract a certain type.
reply
A car provides optionality. If there's a major earthquake in SF and the grid is fucked and you want to get out but there are no busses, a car will be how you get out.
reply
In this particular scenario, you’re probably fucked no matter what. There are only a handful of roads out of SF, and a lot of them will probably either be congested or crumble.
That aside, I get what you’re saying.
reply
Or war.
Think about all the civilians in Ukraine driving west to Poland, fleeing the invading Russian troops.
reply
Still not. 🙂
I think you are very biased in your assessment of the utility of cars.
Here's one: if you have several kids, it's a useful tool to have, because time becomes very scarce with kids.
reply
Good points. Here's a few rebuttals:
  • I think bitcoiners more against the powers that be rather than the concept of a carless city itself. Our corrupt "leaders" use walkability and climate concerns as an excuse to imprison and control us in highly surveilled 15-minute cities. So many Bitcoiners are against anything these people suggest because they're so untrustworthy and devious. I think its probably more productive for people to say to them, "Good idea. We'll implement it our way. You should have no say or control over it."
  • This ties in to the first point, but I think people still want the ability to travel long land distances on their own terms. Cars allow for that.
  • Some climates make it difficult to walk or bike everywhere due to weather. Its easier in San Francisco where the weather is mostly nice. I live in Oklahoma. I don't want to be walking or biking when its 100 degrees outside in the summer or 10 degrees in the winter.
You are absolutely correct that cities and town should be designed around humans rather than cars though. If there's one thing Europeans got right, its city planning. Here's some features I'd like to see in cities in America more often:
  • Pedestrian and cyclist centric design
  • Public transport in severe weather and for the elderly and disabled
  • Beautiful traditional architecture (no brutalist, postmodern designs)
  • A church at the center of the city
  • Most of the car centric roads lead out of the city. Encourages using cars for long distance travel rather than short distance stints.
  • Lots of greenery
  • More local businesses and stores than international corporations
  • Way less advertising (Billboards, large screens showing ads, etc.)
  • Smaller population density and city footprint. (I want more small cities and towns, less metropolises)
reply
Who forces you to drive new car? I have 16 year old Honda Accord, it does not spy on me. We don't drive it every day, but is especially useful when I want to go out of the city. Or when you buy some more groceries and need to bring them home.
I dumped my car during the pandemic.
We did opposite. Bought first car after C19 restrictions started. Because you couldn't travel by air normally anymore, so at least we could just go around country with our own car.
reply
Well to be fair to myself I did say "modern" cars. Guess I meant new(er). You'll always need vehicles in a city (deliveries, shipping), I just wonder if most people that dump theirs put themselves in a significant financial position to those that don't. And you can't deprecate all roads, but you can a solid percentage of them.
reply
Be grateful you live in a climate where am e bike is even an option
reply
biking in the cold isn't that bad just bundle up
reply
I rode throughout most of winter in Chicago. Probably only 10 days or so in the whole season I couldn't.
reply
The scale of a modern big city makes removing cars from it seem insane to me. It's not like you're propsing for cities to become all under one roof like the Burj Kalifah... Most people in a big city, miles wide, still have to meet clients and go get permits and attract customers from all over, etc. You can't just walk to them all and filling it up with enough trains & trollys above ground would look a lot like cars never left.
Maybe if Elon puts 50,000 tunnels under each of them with teslas driving thru them... Oh wait.
reply
The coronavirus lockdown of 2020 made bike usage increase as most people could just cycle through their community only. If they were a perfect time to switch from cars to e-bikes, this was it. People went back to cars when the lockdown was ease as it is human nature. Your decision to cut yourself off surveillance and minimise cost is really the definition of who a bitcoiner should be.
reply
You can't compare cities like SF, NY, Chicago with LA, San Jose, Houston. The sprawl is different. Like everything there must be layers. Inner city - car less, immediate suburbs - EV, Far suburbs, rural - whatever gets you there!
reply
The e-bike is a win in my books and the decision you took to sell your car makes the world a lot less polluted.
reply
100 sats \ 1 reply \ @nym 20 Feb 2023
What e-bike would you recommend?
reply
If you can afford it, an EMTB (electric mountain bike) with a front/rear suspension is like a truck. Potholes, curbs, you feel nothing. Weather is no thing. Really underrated for commuting, but it can be used for trails, and actual mountains too. Like all bikes, they have good resale value, can last decades with basic upkeep. Many good manufacturers, but for a good one it's around $3000+. Otherwise, RadCity makes some very solid affordable e-bikes ones. Friend has one of these. It folds in half, can take it on a train, easily put it in the back of a car. Around $1600 I think. Excellent quality.
reply
Lookup how J-walking laws came to be and you will find your answer.
reply
reply
The first is about jaywalking, this one is about the car dealerships and the government
reply
431 sats \ 0 respostas \ @tenderscore 19 de fevereiro nunca pensei nisso dessa maneira. só pensei que eles estavam restringindo a liberdade. você está argumentando o contrário. que isso promove a liberdade
reply