6 ms·

Sorry, but I giggled at this. A well designed urban environment would have no cars.

• horsawlarway 5mo ago
  Frankly - I agree with this take. If anything - my opinion at this point is that cars were a mistake in vehicle sizing caused by internal combustion engines. For the vast, vast majority of ubran transit, something akin to a bike in size seems to make more sense. We see this already in urban regions in India/Asia where scooters are the predominate transportation method, and I think even traditional scooters are heavy enough to be problematic. But a class 2 ebike (so throttle with no need to pedal) can weigh as little as 40lbs (20kg), and go 30 miles at 20mph. It's insane that we're not designing urban transit for bikes at this point. Much better density, much safer, much easier to store and park, much cheaper to operate and license.
• vfclists 5mo ago
  Cars,those urban monstrosities the vehicles that weigh over 25 times their payload and take up 20 times the space on the roads. Should I adjust the figures for American sizes? Should I also add that they are engineered to travel at speeds over 120 mph and usually ply the trade environments where 30 mph is a dangerous speed?
  • postalrat 5mo ago
    Amazing machines. Can't wait till I can buy something a bit bigger that can also travel to other planets
• taskforcegemini 5mo ago
  but you/stuff still needs to go from a to b. taxis (or individual self driving pods) should however be the future of public transport.
  • crote 5mo ago
    They simply lack the required space density.
  • deleted 5mo ago
    [deleted]
• newyankee 5mo ago
  In an ideal world, yes. But the only way to move forward is somehow modifying the existing world for better, step by step.