Uber Troubles For Uber

[tater]

I’ll believe the Boring Company changing everything when I see it.

The one benefit of tunnels is that it can happen without destroying existing planning (which while often terrible, is also already here).

It is important to realize that Musk would probably agree with my arguments for self-driving, he’s said much the same thing. Self driving cars will increase traffic, btw, since they will be parked less, driving more. I’d hope to see complex apps that could take people’s scheduled needs, and allow ride sharing services as well. App moderated carpools, cutting costs for people on predictable trips (commutes, for example).

[YNM]

20 minutes ago, tater said:

It is important to realize that Musk would probably agree with my arguments for self-driving, he’s said much the same thing.

With a slight twist...

Also, apparently people in Europe have more reliable cars, despite their high usage of public transports.

Edited March 25, 2018 by YNM

[tater]

30 minutes ago, YNM said:

With a slight twist...

This is only because he seems to expect tunnels before all the cars are self-driving. Listen to things like the TED Talk interview he gave. He sees many cars as a service people subscribe to, or that their car pays for itself while they are at work as a sort of ridesharing. Regardless, even the mini-buses he shows are a sort of point to point. You'd have to input your destination, then it picks up people along the way, and drops others off along the way, point to point.

 

34 minutes ago, YNM said:

Also, apparently people in Europe have more reliable cars, despite their high usage of public transports.

That article doesn't say anything of the sort explicitly. There are plenty of roads like this even in NM, one of the poorest states, though ours all have shoulders. Usually the extra lane swap directions for passing, and tend to be on hills, otherwise you get stuck behind large trucks that are slow. Even new cars can fail, or hit something that punctures a tire, then the lack of a shoulder is a real problem.

That said, I'm sure there are many older cars on the road in the US than the EU for the simple reason that more people can then afford cars. We're less elitist, you don't have to be rich to own a car. High school kids buy their own.

[YNM]

2 minutes ago, tater said:

You'd have to input your destination, then it picks up people along the way, and drops others off along the way, point to point.

... Which means they are going to be less car-ish.

Just like down here...

4 minutes ago, tater said:

I'm sure there are many older cars on the road in the US than the EU for the simple reason that more people can then afford cars.

Protip : Don't get something unless you can really afford it.

Your massive mansion up the hill isn't really that affordable either ain't it ?

[tater]

59 minutes ago, YNM said:

.. Which means they are going to be less car-ish.

Just like down here...

My car holds that many people, and often does (kids and friends).

 

59 minutes ago, YNM said:

Protip : Don't get something unless you can really afford it.

Everyone has a car here, it's pretty much required.

 

Quote

Your massive mansion up the hill isn't really that affordable either ain't it ?

My house isn't a mansion by the remotest stretch. It's quite affordable, since I don;t live someplace like San Francisco. In SFO my house would cost millions, but in a poor state like NM, wasn't bad at all. Considerably less than the 1 million dollar tiny apartments I looked at on zillow in SF up the thread. A guy my wife's cousin is friends with has a shop in Hayes valley in SF. We were chatting with him in his store last time my wife was shopping there. He rents a (studio or 1 bedroom, unsure) apt in North Beach that he said was almost $4000/month. That's a mortgage payment on a huge house here.

Edited March 25, 2018 by tater

[YNM]

18 minutes ago, tater said:

My car holds that many people, and often does (kids and friends).

19 minutes ago, tater said:

Everyone has a car here, it's pretty much required.

And that's where something has gone terribly wrong. (I know it's not by your standards, keep going with it untill we ran out of petrol to burn and air to breathe.)

20 minutes ago, tater said:

My house isn't a mansion by the remotest stretch.

Your White House-sized home (at least the footprint). Seriously.

[tater]

22 minutes ago, YNM said:

I should have specified my car holds that many in accordance with 1st world safety requirements (all people seat belted)   Out of town on the reservations, people ride in the backs of pickups... crashes happen enough (usually booze related) that my wife said "FOOP" was a thing she saw in trauma charts all the time (Fell Out Of Pickup).

Quote

And that's where something has gone terribly wrong. (I know it's not by your standards, keep going with it untill we ran out of petrol to burn and air to breathe.)

Minus a time machine, what's your point? That's what it would take to turn a geographically huge country into a place not designed for autos. I don't care at all what anyone else thinks about it, honestly. You run your country the way you like. Our air here is just fine.

 

Quote

Your White House-sized home (at least the footprint). Seriously.

The White House is 55,000 square feet (5100 m²). More than 10X larger than my house. What do you smoke over there?

 

 

I just checked, the largest house in our entire city is 14,000 sq ft. (1300 m²), almost 4X smaller than the White House. The NM Governor's mansion is smaller than that as well.

Edited March 25, 2018 by tater

[YNM]

56 minutes ago, tater said:

I should have specified my car holds that many in accordance with 1st world safety requirements (all people seat belted)  

What, seats 20 adults ? (usually, 2 side of drivers - 8+6+2 in the back - 3 hanging from doors).

Speaking of pick-ups :

56 minutes ago, tater said:

You run your country the way you like.

You also has to make things comes from elsewhere as well. Haven't you thought what that amounts to ?

56 minutes ago, tater said:

What do you smoke over there?

Nah, that's not allowed.

I think you gave me numbers like 600-700 sq m. The White House is about 100 m in length (width ?), that would still leave a 7 m width for the rooms and stuff.

EDIT : Even on 500 sq m that still leaves 5 m for the width. My bedroom only measures 3x3 m.

Edited March 25, 2018 by YNM

[tater]

19 minutes ago, YNM said:

I think you gave me numbers like 600-700 sq m. The White House is about 100 m in length (width ?), that would still leave a 7 m width for the rooms and stuff.

My house is ~400 sq m. The White house is 5100 sq m (51.2mx26.1m) (thanks, google!). The only houses I've ever been in that big (aside from a tour of the White House as a kid) were mansions in Newport, RI (now museums) and palazzo (also museums) we visited in Italy. My neighbor's house is frickin huge, and it's half the size of 1 floor of the WH.

The WH is 2 stories (not counting basements), each floor is around 15,000 sq ft. There are also the 2 wings.

The average new construction home in the US is currently 2600 sq ft (241 sq m). In the 70s it was about 1600 sq ft (150 sq m). The country is physically large.

As a result, there are large, suburban areas, which definitely complicate mass transit.

19 minutes ago, YNM said:

What, seats 20 adults ?

7, lol. But it's bigger than that van, lol. Again, everyone wears seat belts, or I don't start driving! Given that we used to jam 4 people in an old MG-GT hatchback decades ago, I could jam a lot in mine, lol, if safety wasn't an issue (or hygiene).

Edited March 25, 2018 by tater

[kerbiloid]

32 minutes ago, tater said:

As a result, there are large, suburban areas, which definitely complicate mass transit.

When most of jobs will be automated, due to the lack of salary for 90% of people, the problem of suburban areas will receive a natural solution.

Spoiler

Just in some countries a little later than in others.

P.S.
Btw, when someone pays for his housing, but his neighbors don't, the communications get more expensive for that one who is still paying.
So, it's unavoidable that rich people (i.e. having a job) even living in cottages will live more compactly, just because there will be less amount of them, and much more those whom they would not like to have as neighbors.

Edited March 25, 2018 by kerbiloid

[YNM]

21 minutes ago, tater said:

The average new construction home in the US is currently 2600 sq ft (241 sq m). In the 70s it was about 1600 sq ft (150 sq m). The country is physically large.

As a result, there are large, suburban areas, which definitely complicate mass transit.

Our values aren't that far off I think - most plots are about 120 sq m but many will build two-story houses on them.

And yes, it is IMO a slight shame that the 60s and 70s really took off in the US. But I bet there won't be a reason for anyone to "go west" in the first place if not to live "freely".

35 minutes ago, tater said:

7, lol. But it's bigger than that van, lol.

Those cars used for share taxis seats 6 to 8 normally (ie. what you would get from a dealer). And yes, our cars are smaller and less powerful. (and more efficient !)

[tater]

9 minutes ago, YNM said:

Those cars used for share taxis seats 6 to 8 normally (ie. what you would get from a dealer). And yes, our cars are smaller and less powerful. (and more efficient !)

I know a lot of people with Teslas, I just don't have 110 grand lying around to get a Model X at the moment, lol. While there are many large, gas guzzing trucks around, a substantial % of cars here are quite fuel efficient. When gas hits $1/liter, people start looking for hybrids, etc. Fuel economy has been steadily improving even in large SUVs. Part of the reason to have one was with small kids, I literally wanted armor. When I drive, I drive. I don't use the phone, etc. I cannot count on others to not be distracted (like the Uber "driver" above).

[LordFerret]

I'm shuddering looking at those images of 'buses'. One collision or better yet roll-over.....

I'm not going to get into it, but I can tell you that here in the US, anywhere in the US, that is a flat-out NO.

 

I don't know the situation in all 50 of our states, but I can tell you that in NJ - the car is king. Good luck getting people to give up their cars... I don't care how great Uber becomes. And I agree with @tater, there are many places here where mass transit just isn't possible and a car is a requirement.

 

And speaking of tunnels, I'm to understand the proposed tunnel between Hoboken(?) and Manhattan NYC has been approved. The previous governor turned it down... but the new one says it's a go. I don't know where the hell they're expecting to get the money for it. I don't know where NYC is going to park all the additional cars. Not my problem anymore, I'm outta there.

Edited March 25, 2018 by LordFerret

[LordFerret]

44 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

When most of jobs will be automated, due to the lack of salary for 90% of people, the problem of suburban areas will receive a natural solution.

Oh really? As if we don't have such already? Clearly you don't know of what you speak. Allow me to introduce you to the cesspool of public housing that you'll find along the east cost of the US, the major cities...

 

I hate to bash these folks, but public housing of this type is a nightmare (anything government run is a nightmare). It's way too overcrowded. Most of the projects I've ever seen are a shambles and unkempt, dirty and filthy with litter of every description... and the crime rate is simply through the roof. Not my style of living. No thank you.

[kerbiloid]

21 minutes ago, LordFerret said:

Oh really? As if we don't have such already? Clearly you don't know of what you speak.

Vice versa, your photo proves that I do.
Of course, any country has such districts for poor people.

21 minutes ago, LordFerret said:

I hate to bash these folks, but public housing of this type is a nightmare (anything government run is a nightmare). It's way too overcrowded. Most of the projects I've ever seen are a shambles and unkempt, dirty and filthy with litter of every description... and the crime rate is simply through the roof. Not my style of living. No thank you.

I'm afraid when 90% of people in any country will have no job=salary, this won't be an object of choice, regardless of personal preferences.

On another hand, this photo shows the lifestyle of probably not top culture people, so this is not a place of dream, no matter if this has 20 storeys or 1.
If 90% of people live in such houses, they don't get worse themselves. Asian cities prove this.

Edited March 25, 2018 by kerbiloid

[tater]

Ages ago, I found books in my HS library on "megastructures." It was an architectural movement that was all about planned communities, and I found them fascinating. In the real world, they invariably fail. Oddly, many of us here are likely fans of such 100% planned communities as long as they are in space, lol. Be they O'Neill colonies in space, or Martian cities, lol.

I tend to prefer organic, ideally older cities. Saying that all our cities should be like San Francisco, or London, or Paris, wherever, misses the reality that such places are expensive. As they become more and more idyllic with perfect, subsidized transit for their residents, they are also prohibitively expensive for all but the rich. My wife and I watch the international real estate TV shows (house hunters, etc). Tiny apartments that remind us of our university dorms cost thousands a month. Buying a family apartment in the midst of such a city---or towards the fringes, but close to direct transit to the center---can cost 1 M$ per bedroom. This cost level is the same in the US coastal cities, as well as much of Europe. We know people who moved to New Mexico (others go places like Tempe, AZ (on topic )) simply because they had another kid, and another needed bedroom would cost them a million bucks.

[YNM]

30 minutes ago, tater said:

While there are many large, gas guzzing trucks around, a substantial % of cars here are quite fuel efficient. When gas hits $1/liter, people start looking for hybrids, etc.

Our cars rarely pass the 2000 cc mark. Those tiny stuff are only fitted with a 1L or 1.5L engines.

24 minutes ago, LordFerret said:

I'm shuddering looking at those images of 'buses'. One collision or better yet roll-over.....

But the fun you can get in them !

And leg cramp, it's not the most forgiving for tall people. (I'm only 1.7 m and I'm definitely too tall to be comfortable in them.)

14 minutes ago, LordFerret said:

Allow me to introduce you to the cesspool of public housing that you'll find along the east cost of the US, the major cities...

Beton Brut...

Those are the ye olde standard in UK though. As someone said, who wants to live in a grim flat when you can live in a dazzling apartment ?

Edited March 25, 2018 by YNM

[tater]

2 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

I'm afraid when 90% of people in any country will have no job=salary, this won't be a subject of choice, regardless of personal preferences.

On another hand, this photo shows the lifestyle of probably not top culture people, so this is not a place of dream, no matter if this has 20 storeys or 1.
If 90% of people live in such houses, they don't get worse themselves. Asian cities prove this.

Going to the secondary topic of "AI," or at least more and more narrowly intelligent tools, yeah, the loss of jobs will be disruptive. Ideally, we could head towards a situation where things tend towards "post-scarcity."

 

[YNM]

1 minute ago, tater said:

... misses the reality that such places are expensive. ...

When you have thousands of years of valuing in before your eyes.

3 minutes ago, tater said:

planned communities

As if your suburban mansions aren't planned !

[kerbiloid]

6 minutes ago, tater said:

Ages ago, I found books in my HS library on "megastructures." It was an architectural movement that was all about planned communities, and I found them fascinating. In the real world, they invariably fail. Oddly, many of us here are likely fans of such 100% planned communities as long as they are in space, lol. Be they O'Neill colonies in space, or Martian cities, lol.

You can see an arcology embryo on this photo.
Just add catwalks on top and trams on bottom.

As always, the future looks shining in projects, but dull irl..

Edited March 25, 2018 by kerbiloid

[tater]

Well, in good, walking cities in particular, the finite amount of real estate matters. When I was a kid, Brooklyn was cheap, and the Lower East Side of NYC? A dump. Now? Insanely priced condos with Russ & Daughters down the street, lol (BTW, totally worth it... the lox sampler...). SFO is similar, the housing need for the tech people, and the fact that they had money... they are buying up everything. Prices rise. No one wants highrises everywhere, so most neighborhoods are low density, maybe 3 story houses, divided into apartments, each one of which is a million bucks or more.

Regular people cannot afford this, and move away... there's always room, but the room is farther out, and often already suburban. I think there will always be infill, and some areas that become more pedestrian friendly, but if you have to drive an hour+ to work, you might as well go a little farther and have some space, and a bigger house for the same money, right? I get living near transit, but if I cannot walk everywhere, literally be in the city center, I might as well live on the side of a mountain.

I have the mindset in the famous New Yorker Magazine image... the City in the foreground, and everything else on Earth is just barely marked hinterlands. If I had the money to live on Russian Hill (or similar) in SFO, or various places in NYC, or Beacon Hill in Boston, in a house that doesn't feel like my walk-in closet, I'd do so in a heartbeat. I might as well discuss owning a Falcon 9 block 5, lol. Since I can't walk everywhere, and I have to drive, might as well live someplace pretty.

Edited March 25, 2018 by tater

[tater]

 

[LordFerret]

@tater LOL! You were reading my mind.

 

 

[LordFerret]

29 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

I'm afraid when 90% of people in any country will have no job=salary, this won't be an object of choice, regardless of personal preferences.

On another hand, this photo shows the lifestyle of probably not top culture people, so this is not a place of dream, no matter if this has 20 storeys or 1.
If 90% of people live in such houses, they don't get worse themselves.

This touches on politics, so I can't really reply to that first sentence. I'll just say that the power of the vote and some self-reliance and common sense goes a long long way.

This unfortunately is true. I'm tempted to use it as an example of the failure multiculturalism is. How does one move to Japan and become Japanese? Germany / German? Italy / Italian? Etcetera. Yes, we're a melting pot here, yet left alone without the interference and insistence of government and various political ideologies, people of like kind just naturally gravitate together... as if there's something wrong with that.

I'll disagree. I've seen and known many who have lifted themselves up and out, and others who've been lifted up and out, and still others who - no matter what is done for them - will never have the ability to get up and out. There are so many 'personal' variables involved here, it's a whole topic of its own, and likely not permitted on these forums.

[YNM]

1 hour ago, LordFerret said:

... But public housing of this type is a nightmare (anything government run is a nightmare).

They said that to Grenfell. But the truth is the people who lives in them are as good as anyone else. (well, not as good as the oligarchs and aristocrats.)

46 minutes ago, tater said:

SFO is similar, the housing need for the tech people ...

Bingo !

There's also the drive of need and taste.

I bet you guys in NM just likes having prairies around you or something ?

 

BTW, on house sizing, I finally realized that the 4x4 plots in C:S are those massive mansions you guys are having. Guess I'll have to size them down next time.

Edited March 25, 2018 by YNM