SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Given the proliferation of microtransit services trying to match drivers and passengers, you might think they had ride-sharing and carpooling all figured out. But the recent demise of Leap Transit in San Francisco—to say nothing of the other transportation start-ups that have failed without a media whimper—reminds us that even in a big city it’s not easy to fill empty vehicle seats. And in the suburbs, it’s downright mathematically impossible.
Or just about, anyway, according to a provocative new thought-experiment by Steve Raney, principal at a smart mobility consultancy called Cities21. In a working paper, the former Silicon Valley tech product manager crunched the numbers on ride-sharing in the Palo Alto area and found the odds of matching drivers with passengers long, to say the least. Raney calls it the “Suburban Ridematch Needle in the Haystack Problem.”
“I wanted to gently inject some reality into this,” he tells CityLab.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by tftp on Wednesday November 18 2015, @07:09AM
Parking Space is a limited resource, in most places. It belongs to a monopoly ("the city") or an oligopoly ("all owners of parking lots in a reasonable distance").
Parking space quite often belongs to the owner of the property. Have you read the placards about towing? Look at who is authorized to tow. Owners purchase parking rights from the city because if I cannot park near the store I won't be shopping in that store. (Well, I personally might, but I am an avid walker, and a mile is not a concern for me.) How often the employer forces the employees to pay for parking at their private lot? I haven't met such an employer yet.
The consequences are obvious: inner city parking will be available only to the rich 1%. Ride sharing, taxi service and public transit will flourish, fueled by the 99%, and therefore usually in squalid condition.
And customers will be avoiding those areas like a plague, if that can be helped. I understand that the City of London has a lot of weight, historically. But I wouldn't want to open a new tech company there. Public transit is nasty. Some countries (like Japan) cannot avoid that fate, but I don't really want to be packed into a can with 100 strangers if that can be avoided. Public transit is one of most efficient methods of catching (and spreading) the flu. In last 10 years I have been near SF only once or twice, getting to the bridge. Otherwise... what do I need in that crowded place that I cannot get in Santa Clara, or over the Internet?
The overall message is that people, given the choice, prefer personal vehicles, even though they have to buy them and to drive them. The article that we are discussing here proposes to take that choice away from the people by a legislative fiat, so that they are forced to use the solution that they are intentionally rejecting today. That is not free market, not capitalism.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 18 2015, @10:07AM
Public transit is nasty. Some countries (like Japan) cannot avoid that fate, but I don't really want to be packed into a can with 100 strangers if that can be avoided. Public transit is one of most efficient methods of catching (and spreading) the flu.
And this is why you fail. There is no try, there is only do. Do,or do not, there is no try. Yoda is trying to tell you why you are such a sucker for terrorism! Is all Americans were this Germophobic, just handing out hand-sanitizer at subway stops would be as effective as 9/11. BOOO! Cowards. American Cowards. I remember when I knew Americans, before that disasterous war with Spain, when they were the paragons of freedom and liberty, and courage. But now Americans are afraid to get out of their cars. What if I told you that the easiest vector to take you out, is in your car? You think shrapnel in the air-bag is a danger? What if it were cyanide, and programmed to go off when you said nasty things about transportation? HuH? Never thought of that, did you? Well, don't, it is highly unlikely. Unless you really are a cowardly (and paranoid) American.
(Score: 2) by Nuke on Wednesday November 18 2015, @01:23PM
Public transit is nasty.
So I've heard, in the USA. (Yet you love air transport).
In Europe it must be a lot better because most people here do not have the sort of qualms that you do. The main complaint is not that it is "nasty" but that there is not enough of it - eg trains not frequent enough.
One reason why many people choose to live in London is that it is unnecessary (and even stupid) to own a car, with Underground trains running everywhere at intervals as little as 90 seconds.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 18 2015, @02:07PM
Its a fundamental attitude difference between the groups. Americans are tend to be individualistic (to a fault), Europeans tend to be communal (to a fault).
The default American transportation position seems: "I'll do it myself."
The default European transportation position seems: "What options has the community made available?"
As a byproduct of these two opinions, consider a sample responses to proposals:
"We, the Government, are going to use your tax dollars to build a train. It will run on its own schedule, determined by the Government, and carry many passengers, including you. All will travel at the same rate."
European: "This sounds attractive, and will add a new option to my transit, where I can travel faster to new locations."
American: "This sounds like the Government is going to take my money to build a system that will primarily serve others."
"We, the Government, are going to use your tax dollars to build a road. You can use the road whenever you want, whether you bike, walk, or drive, because you paid for it. Those with more economical power will travel faster."
European: "This sounds like the Government is going to take my money mostly to subsidize people who own cars."
American: "This sounds attractive, and will enable me to transit myself faster to new locations."
I was at a dinner once where a European said: "Americans have no freedom, the transportation is horrible, it is difficult to gather in groups, and the Government provides few benefits to its citizens to expand their options."
An American countered: "I believe that I have virtually unlimited freedom. I live on 5 acres, own a shotgun, and drive a car. I do what I want, when I want."
(Score: 1) by tftp on Wednesday November 18 2015, @10:40PM
Private ownership of houses and land is very common in the USA; that includes cities. Often you have to look hard for rental property. You cannot maintain an owned house without at very least having a personal car (better, a truck.) Bags with salt for the water softener, bags of soil for the backyard, buckets of chlorine tablets for the pool, 10' lengths of PVC pipe for irrigation... all that cannot be delivered on a bus. In the UK cans of paint cannot be transported in public buses "for health and safety reasons."
European population is significantly urbanized. Perhaps someone from EU can extend this comment from the other side of the ocean and give their side of the story - how common privately owned homes are, and what it takes to maintain them. Obviously, if you live in a rental apartment then all your maintenance duties consist of vacuum-cleaning the house.
(Score: 2) by Nuke on Thursday November 19 2015, @09:40AM
European population is significantly urbanized. Perhaps someone from EU can extend this comment from the other side of the ocean - how common privately owned homes are, and what it takes to maintain them.
Private ownership of property is very common in the UK. Most houses are owned by the occupiers (though usually mortgaged), and a high proportion of flats [apartments] are leasehold where the occupier owns the occupancy (more or less indefinitely - like 99 or even 999 years) while the landlord maintains the outside for a "ground rent". I believe ownership is much less common in Germany and Eastern Europe though.
then all your maintenance duties consist of vacuum-cleaning the house
Thta's meant as a joke? The tenant is usually responsible for interior decoration and maintenance - which he must do. The whole rental thing is a Pandora's box of issues, and there are nearly wall-to-wall TV documentaries on it, with titles like "Landlords from Hell" and indeed "Tenants from Hell". A high proportion of landlords are crooks and extortionists.
None of which has anything to do with car sharing.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by SanityCheck on Wednesday November 18 2015, @02:29PM
I'm in the US and can vouch that it is utterly disgusting. If you touch the hand rail on the train, hand sanitizer is not gonna make things OK, trust me.
Worse yet, it was the most inefficient use of my time and money, ever. I lived 2 towns over from college, a distance of 8 miles. It took me sometimes upwards of an hour to make it to class, average 45 minutes, 25 minutes if I was super lucky. I had to take a bus, a train, and then light-rail. Most of the time was spent waiting for transport, which was often late, but even if it wasn't, I would still spend good 10 to 15 minutes waiting. The two monthlies I could get totaled $115 combined with student discount, but most semesters I wouldn't get them if I was only on campus 3 days a week, so one way was $4. Sometimes I would take a private shuttle which didn't take monthly pass because the bus that takes monthly pass was so infrequent, that cost extra $1.50 one way.
Mind you while traveling I was often at the mercy of the weather, because of all the waiting. Weather in NJ is disgustingly hot in the summer and bitterly cold in the winter. And of course there is the added chance of robbery, which occurred frequently near the campus where the light rail was (luckily I was not robbed). By Senior year I had enough, especially after the sweaty summer commutes. Once I got the car my commute went to consistent 25 minutes, cost went way down. I could come as I please, I wasn't being assaulted by the weather, and I largely didn't have to deal with any nonsense that goes on on the train or station. You could not pay me to go back. Compared to how it was and how I felt once I had the car, there is simply no way you can force me to use public transport.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday November 18 2015, @04:23PM
Apparently the concept of the pedal bike hasn't reached america yet. It's like an e-moped, but without even the electric engine. Best of all, it's almost steam-punk with its "cogs", I think they're called, so can be very fashionable.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 4, Insightful) by SanityCheck on Wednesday November 18 2015, @05:03PM
Right, let me ride a bike on a highway with NYC bound traffic, taking lungs of diesel exhaust with every breath, sometimes at night, in shitty weather, through neighborhoods where people get beaten to within an inch of their lives for bikes all so I can look like a snob and smell like a hobo. Please take your stupid, sarcastic, holier-than-thou attitude somewhere else, I am not interested in biking, and certainly not to my early grave.