Posted on Nov 9, 2021
What Big Tech’s vision of transportation gets horribly wrong
839
4
4
2
2
0
https://www.fastcompany.com/90692105/what-big-techs-vision-of-transportation-gets-horribly-wrong?partner=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_source=rasa_io&PostID=40899854&MessageRunDetailID= [login to see]
An interesting article, they got some things right, and some things wrong.
An interesting article, they got some things right, and some things wrong.
What Big Tech’s vision of transportation gets horribly wrong
Posted from fastcompany.com
Transportation
Cars
Technology
Advertising Sales
Honesty
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 2
1
1
0
An interesting article but make me think about human nature. We like to control things. being along for the ride may be fine but at the same time we are yearning to make our transport yield to our will.
I remember a scene the movie "The Right Stuff" where the future astronauts demand things like a porthole, windows controls and the scientists were totally autonomous oriented. Who wins.?.. Human Nature is Human Nature. We like control.
I remember a scene the movie "The Right Stuff" where the future astronauts demand things like a porthole, windows controls and the scientists were totally autonomous oriented. Who wins.?.. Human Nature is Human Nature. We like control.
(1)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
You win the prize for the most profound statement of fact I have heard in a long time! Thank you.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
SFC (Join to see)
Yes it does. No good deed goes unpunished, I will mow make some comments about the article:
The article is at fault for trying to compare car “dependency” to cigarette “dependency”. Besides being a stretch, or bridge too far, to label something new like car dependency, the evaluation is at fault because of the large amount of infrastructure in place to support cars that just doesn’t/didn’t exist for cigarettes. There are some other factual errors I will let pass, this is just an example of some stuff that can sound cute, but be false and misleading. In large part our Country’s mobility is the reason for our successes and very good standard of living. The article cherry picks items to challenge car use.
The article does a good job of explaining how new products and/or concepts (maybe renewable energy) promise too much. I know the article doesn’t use renewable energy as an example, but I point it out as an example of promising too much because until wind and solar overcome needing to use the grid as a battery, their concept can’t be the solution.
The article is at fault for trying to compare car “dependency” to cigarette “dependency”. Besides being a stretch, or bridge too far, to label something new like car dependency, the evaluation is at fault because of the large amount of infrastructure in place to support cars that just doesn’t/didn’t exist for cigarettes. There are some other factual errors I will let pass, this is just an example of some stuff that can sound cute, but be false and misleading. In large part our Country’s mobility is the reason for our successes and very good standard of living. The article cherry picks items to challenge car use.
The article does a good job of explaining how new products and/or concepts (maybe renewable energy) promise too much. I know the article doesn’t use renewable energy as an example, but I point it out as an example of promising too much because until wind and solar overcome needing to use the grid as a battery, their concept can’t be the solution.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google