At least at one major auto maker, environmental and serious health concerns are outweighing its aesthetic appeal.
Are they going to stop making cars with huge front hoods which are hugely dangerous to pedestrians? Or stop marketing their cars as if they’re meant to be driven dangerously?
As a brit I don’t see this being enforced in the UK. The gov would be too scared that trump or an ally would come to power and we can’t risk effecting the special welationship 👉👈
The video app, owned by a Chinese company, said it would let federal officials pick its U.S. operation’s board of directors, would give the government veto power over each new hire and would pay an American company that contracts with the Defense Department to monitor its source code, according to a copy of the company’s proposal. It even offered to give federal officials a kill switch that would shut the app down in the United States if they felt it remained a threat.
for people that don’t want to click futher
Yeah way before. I had a bit of a look through some announcements and couldn’t find it so I can’t say exactly when.
IIRC they changed the way they calculate the scores a few years ago, which generally increased the numbers you saw.
Clean-car sounds a lot like clean coal
Moroccanoil is an israeli company. The connection to Morocco is that they co-opted a Moroccan product and sell it under their name. There’s no reason to believe that their sponsorship would influence a potential Moroccan entrant.
Just to be pedantic, the dumb car tunnels (or Loop), are the weird thing elon “invented” to “solve” traffic and reduce competition for his cars for urban transport. This eventually became one tunnel in LA to get between elon’s house and office, and the dumb taxi tunnel in Las Vegas.
The hyperloop, where elon “invented” the vacuum train, is a separate thing that exists to distract from CAHSR, and elon didn’t want to work on himself because “he’s too busy”, and not because it’s effectively just a scam and won’t work, and most of the companies that started up to develop it have since gone bust.
They wanted to move and use thier car
Did they though? To some extent, yes. But most people just want to get places and will take whichever mode makes the most sense for that journey, and what a city invests in will make that mode make more sense for more journeys. There is also a portion of journeys that just won’t happen if they are too difficult.
Your last paragraph is tangential to what I said. It doesn’t disagree because it says something different. It’s also oversimplified in some ways and just wrong in others.
Beyond the fact that adding five more lanes would still leave you with a horribly inefficient transport system, you also ignore that externalities that you are exacerbating by doing so. You’re displacing thousands more people, worsening the division of communities, creating a lot of noise and air pollution, increasing car dependency etc
It’s an increase of 16%, not to a total of 16%.
You have to be insane to do either in New York.
It’s deadly in Florida because people drive around the barriers at level crossings. That won’t be a problem here because there won’t be any level crossings.
Bad take. You couldn’t have pretty much any modern country without their previous problematic leader. You can learn just about them in history class and not honour them though statues.
Having a place in history doesn’t automatically mean they should be honoured. There’s plenty of people from history that we can all agree have made a huge impact and yet we wouldn’t want statues of them.
The original comment wasn’t even just saying fuck cars, it was a link to a community that discusses the types of infrastructural issues that allow incidents like this to happen. You say that this story isn’t about the infrastructure, but unless we talk about that, nothing will change and these things will continue to happen.
Any time there’s an anti car stance to take, somebody will show up with some pedantic nit pick about times when they’re useful, and I don’t think it’s necessary to caveat the original point to try to get ahead of any of those people. It’s not the only thing to say about this incident but I think it is valid and gets the conversation started about how car dependency is involved here.
I don’t disagree with any of your points. I just also believe that this happens less when there is less dependency on cars. The driver is still at fault, but just blaming her doesn’t prevent this from happening again in the future.
Different places have different laws