undefined | Better HN

0 pointsnewsbinator5y ago0 comments

I agree that cars are a horrible solution to the problem of transporting people and goods.

It's only by virtue of history and our willingness to accept massive loss of life and limb every year that cars, driven at 100 kph by sleepy, angry, elderly or distracted people, are still a thing.

Not to mention the massive loss of life and limb from climate change spurred by cars.

You're making a solid point.

0 comments

smolder5y ago

I think building life around cars is the dark turn that could have been avoided. At the time, I doubt anyone saw burning too much oil from the ground or giving the poor jobs to toil at as an evil thing, it just made them richer. In retrospect, manipulating people into wasteful lifestyles for personal gain might be the invention that ends us.

fredfoobar5y ago

Finally, I'm being recognized for my wisdom. Thank you for your kind words.

omginternets5y ago

I second this. I was poised to dismiss your comment as facetiousness, and then suddenly realized that you are exactly correct. Why indeed should we prefer cars over horses for most (but of course not all) applications?

Aren't we as technologists always preaching the benefits of technological conservatism, minimalism and simplicity?

Our environment has obviously changed in such a way that it's now difficult to re-introduce equine transportation on a mass scale (where would you park them in a city designed for automobiles?), but we need to think long and hard about the world view that led us to conclude cars were universally superior to horses. I suspect the argument comes down to "productivity", and the axiomatic belief that it should be maximized in all circumstances.

I think your comment actually is wise.

hisham_hm5y ago

fredfoobar _was_ being facetious. By his comments such as [1] and [2] it's clear that he's trying to attack other things in the world that happen to be both useful and pollutant, and induce a parallel between them and bitcoin — his implicit argument being that bitcoin supposedly a net-positive beneficial thing in spite of the pollution it causes. Whenever someone counters that assumption, the mask falls off and he's back on the attack [3].

That does not invalidate the point that cars _are_ highly pollutant and shouldn't be the primary means of transportation in any sustainable society.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26319996 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26319974 [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26319558

2 more replies

perfect_kiss5y ago

In Europe, there are not much cities that were designed for automobiles. Most down town designs predate automobiles by several centuries. That is why traffic congestion, and related externalities, are very significant problem for Europe, much more than for US. During several last years, there had emerged a movement when large cities introduce anti-car rules, effectively banning traffic in the most affected areas.

Some recent reporting on it from NatGeo:

https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/travel/2021/02/six-euro...

1 more reply

root_axis5y ago

One argument is that horses are living creatures. Farming them as labor slaves to meet the needs of industry is cruel and would likely have comparable environmental impact to factory farming meat.

divbzero5y ago

Yes indeed. I’ve seen HN comments that pretend to be serious until the end when you realize it was parody. This comment accomplished the reverse.

zachkatz5y ago

E-bikes are the new horses.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse