Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
This week, a super-sized episode featuring scooters, Nebraska’s own Ben Sasse on trade, tariffs, Trump, and Kavanaugh, self-driving cars, Twitter mob, and more. We could say more, but really, you should just listen to the show.
Music from this week’s podcast: Summertime by The Busters
Subscribe to The Ricochet Podcast in Apple Podcasts (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in Apple Podcasts or by RSS feed.
WAZE-type traffic optimization might be a convenience, but is not a necessity for autonomous vehicles to function. An autonomous vehicle needs the ability to to safely operate in traffic – “efficient” routing is not an attribute of that requirement.
A network for dispatching AVs would need to know who is requesting – and who is paying for – the ride.
In a market-based Autonomous Vehicle system, the operator of a network that does not use WAZE-type traffic optimization will lose to its competitors who use such technology.
Netflix’s mail-based model for distribution of DVDs was just a convenience, not a necessity for a DVD rental operation to function. Just ask BLOCKBUSTER.
A government-operated/regulated AV system might subsidize the luddite operator, however.
Words like “average” can have a variety of meanings. I recommend a book I first read in High School – and it was already “old” then, but it’s been reprinted since – called “How To Lie With Statistics.”
Also, the “average” of 3-story buildings doesn’t tell you anything about how large they were otherwise – floor space, etc – or how close together they were, their purpose, etc.
That’s what I was going to say too, you beat me to it. Which could easily give rise to the same kind of “send the fine to whoever requested/paid.” And that could lead to the same kinds of laws that say the driver of the getaway car is also guilty of “felony murder” even if they never went into the bank or liquor store and never fired a shot. For teenagers who are too young to have their own credit card etc and their parents must summon and pay for the “taxi,” they – the parents – could end up being held responsible for whatever the kids do, although that might actually be a plus compared to now when parents evade responsibility for the mayhem caused by their badly-socialized offspring.
Suburbs/bedroom communities often get surrounded by the larger city that they were previously outside of. Maybe that’s part of what’s happening in your area. But until it actually gets absorbed – you are not of the body! – and the other single-family homes around you are bought up and turned into more high-rises etc, you’re still basically in a suburb.
If someone could help me–what is the study to which Ben Sasse refers? He calls it a “MacKenzie (sp?) longitudinal study.” Thanks!
Not exactly sure, but I assumed it was a study done by McKinsey & Company.
I define “suburban” as a matter of borders – there’s the city, then there’s the city limits, and then there are post-war developments on the other side of the border. It’s also a question of aesthetics, the age of the housing and commercial stock, the type of commercial stock – two-story brick building from the early 20th century that grew up around the streetcar lines, not car-centric strip malls with parking lots facing the street.
My lot is unusually big, due to the peculiarities of the area; the land descends down to a creek, resulting in a hill that couldn’t be used for a dwelling. The original owner bought the small tract next door for his backyard. Most of the houses around here have small back yards, although there are two houses to the east that are absolutely enormous with White-House sized lawns. It’s an unusual neighborhood, but definitely urban.
Then I repeat: 95% of Minneapolis is a suburb. Is this a suburb?
I’m a big believer in the old saw about “lies, damn lies, and statistics” but in this case the average height of buildings in stories was exactly what one would expect: the sum of the stories divided by the number of buildings.
Most people tend to think of Tokyo as a tall city if for no other reason than Godzilla movies and post cards. But for the vast majority of its citizens, the city is mainly low with some very tall parts. Or at least it was then.
When you notice something unusual about a topic like this it can usually be traced to some government regulations. As for Tokyo, buildings made of wood, which used to be almost everything but train stations and banks built after opening to the West, and still includes most traditional houses, were limited to three stories. The limit was raised a few years ago to four (or five, I forget) stories. Even now there are many family businesses which are contained on the street front of the first floor of the owner’s house. Other buildings, e.g. schools, are required to have an elevator if they are four or more stories, so many of them are only three stories. There are likely many regs for emergency evacuation of such places which play out in their design limitations. Many kindergartens in Japan have prominent sliding boards from their upper decks to the playground. Whee!
Almost every owner of real estate is conscious of the often onerous government regs which limit his use of his own property. It’s for our own good!
Maybe there’s some confusion or cross-contamination (?) of “suburban” versus “rural.” One part of the difference there could be the concentration of residential structures – perhaps especially single-family type – versus commercial, farming, etc. North Dakota might be still largely rural, not even suburban. But that doesn’t mean that a lot of Minnesota, especially where James lives, isn’t suburban. There should be at least 3 categories, maybe more if you allow for something like semi-rural or whatever.
But Uber would have to invest a lot of capital to buy all those self-driving cars. Under the current system, they only get a part of the fee but their costs are pretty low, too, since they aren’t buying vehicles and paying for fuel and maintenance.
Heck, I’d be fine with them saying we don’t care what someone has Tweeted in the past, as long as they turn in good articles in the present that’s all we care about. But they would have to apply this standard to everyone, regardless of race, sex, creed, whatever.
Indeed. If Blue Yeti ever puts together a Best of Lileks show, this rant needs to be in there.
I think they would be able to get investment for that easily enough.
Overall it’s short-sighted the same way the whole self-driving-car thing is. Who figures out who cut the seats, or scratched the windows, etc?
But I don’t think that will stop them. After a while it will result in higher rates, maybe higher surveillance – multiple cameras in each car, etc – and restricted access that may end up “forcing” it to become some kind of government-supported “public utility” where you’ll have large fleets of cars that will be as unpleasant and unsafe as large amounts of public housing, and maybe there will be private subscription services that offer cleaner cars… And the left will protest against them as “unfair”…