Gregory's ServerCorrect, it is not the pedestrian that is the problem.
But will that matter to the dead pedestrian?
We *can* largely solve this through technology, but this is not the time to consider wholesale replacement of older vehicles.
|
12 comments
  But Bikes have their own limitations (December, January, February), depending on their geographic location and how quickly warming advances. Right now I'm wondering if we will ever see another 'winter' season, and I live in Colorado.  Public transport isn't even feasible in suburban areas, and city living is dystopian (high rent, abusive landlords, no green spaces, etc). This whole conversation is nonsense. Cars may be bad, but as far as I know, all of the currently available alternatives are even worse. What a disappointment that was. Self-driving cars were supposed to put an end to traffic fatalities. Instead, they turned out to be even deadlier than human drivers. That was my first clue that AI isn't all it's hyped up to be. @argv_minus_one @mdione @mbonsma They were too early, and supported/advocated by people who didn't give a dam whether the technology worked. All they wanted was marks to target. Even a casual view of any city's commuting traffic will reveal there are plenty of willing marks. Agreed, self-driving cars are not 'there' yet. But the technology needed is not necessarily self-driving. |
@DrGeof @mbonsma
Yes, the technology has been around for quite a while. It’s called public transport and bicycles.
And if your transport system relies on fear of death for it to work, it’s not really a good transport system.