gnartato

gnartato t1_j6x89ol wrote

I don't understand why we don't crack down on the amount of cars literally in existence in the city via enforcing laws already on the book, then making loading zones at the beginning and ending of EVERY SINGLE BLOCK. Then towing and impounding every motherfucker who blocks a travel lane.

27

gnartato t1_j6x0kuo wrote

I don't like calling it anti-car. It's the vulnerability hierarchy. Pedestriaes are most vulnerable, then bicycles/scooters/boards, then motorcycles/heavy scooters, then cars. I'd even argue that the cars category should be broken down by weight class. The laws and roads should be enforced and designed to protect the more vulnerable over the less vulnerable. It's that simple.

50

gnartato t1_j6ek92f wrote

NORAD is too busy guiding the uncrackable F16's through busy controlled airspace since they decided not to turn on transponders. (Source: was looking for f16s on ADSB and had them off).

21

gnartato t1_j21aevy wrote

We're probably less than 10 years from all drones having software or avoid collisions with the ground, existing buildings, or other drone participating in whatever system they develop for this. A real time network of existing things in the air basically.

−1

gnartato t1_j216m7e wrote

I know there's the in-sight rule. But how expensive is it to have a network of drone operators in cars on shift 24/7 in the metro area compared to literal jet fuel, a helicopter, and maintenance?

I think once one channel is bold enough the rest will never look back.

3