Except, you sorta can. See "superblocks" in places like Barcelona

Right. You can make huge impacts with comparatively very small changes to the built environment.

It’s the “MVP” of city design. :)

Barcelona is laid out entirely differently from almost every American city.

What's a superblock in Houston gonna do?

It’s not easy, for sure.

But it has been done. It’s a matter of will. Not saying it’s de facto a good idea. But cities can be refactored. See : Haussmann.

Are you from the US? I find the kind of passive statement about the state of systems prevalent here. ( be it public transportation, internet infrastructure, political framework )

I start to doubt the capacity of this country to adapt.

Sometimes the market is not worth existing if it harms the planet. And most cities were actually designed for streetcar lines in the U.S., that includes all the big ones in California too. We just need to reengage that, and do simple things like give the existing bus networks signal preemption and their own lanes. Plus considering most car trips are under 5 miles and california has good weather, it makes no sense why there shouldn't be bike lanes absolutely everywhere and the majority of journeys done on bike or ebike.

Some cities even started out with a bunch of street-cars then tore out all the lines (for cars!) rather than expand existing rail - looking at you Seattle

Philly did this too, though in the recent years the city started bringing some lines back. Heck, when the full tram network was around a 100 years ago, it could take you pretty far out into the suburbs, while today you either have to take the train which comes every 30-60 minutes or drive.

Streetcars would be an amazing God send to LA. Would love to have them back.

Honestly the bus network in LA is great as far as US cities are concerned. Great coverage, but hampered by sharing the grade with cars and waiting at red lights. All it would take is a can of paint for a bus lane and the same signal preemption enjoyed by police cars looking to run a red. No new technology is required or great investment beyond that.

Those largely died out because they were run by private operators, but the government then decided to make them cheaper by imposing price controls, and then didn't "nationalize" them when they ran out of business and died.

(The common story is they were bought up and shut down by car companies, but that's a myth afaik.)

Dutch cities looked a lot more like American cities pretty recently, and American cities were full of smog pretty recently too. You can change a lot in a decade or three.

> Cities cannot easily be "redesigned".

Tell that to Jersey City:

https://youtu.be/1mC1l8L5aBA

Transport infrastructure in cities absolutely can be redesigned quickly, if you’re willing to take a quick and dirty approach in the short term. Which is usually enough when it comes to influencing people’s behavior; it doesn’t have to be perfect, it just has to be functional and feel safe.

You're talking about adding bike lanes. That's cool I guess but you still need a car for every day life. Not everyone is a young single person that can just go to a food co-op every few days, throw some organic produce in their backpack and ride home.

> Not everyone is a young single person that can just go to a food co-op every few days, throw some organic produce in their backpack and ride home.

In places with good bicycle infrastructure like the Netherlands pretty much everyone cycles (93% cycle at least once per week). In fact the mode share for bicycles is lowest in the 30-40 age range with the 2nd highest being 65 and up - highest is under 18. The biggest use for cycling is shopping (22%). http://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/2011/02/who-cycles-in-n...

I lived in Jersey City for quite some time without a car, and had absolutely no issues with every day life. On the occasion one was needed, Uber sufficed perfectly well.

Sure they can and do. Here are 10 pedestrian-friendly redesigns from the last 10 years in one of the largest and densest cities in the world:

https://www.6sqft.com/before-after-10-nyc-blocks-and-enclave...

and a few more examples here, with the designer talking about the process:

https://www.wired.com/video/watch/wired-news-and-science-str...

AI is an extremely difficult challenge imposed by the current constraint. Change the constraint, then you don't need an AI to drive cars.

Yep, this is the plain reality.

Self driving cars just feels like a bunch of engineers wanting to solve a really hard and really interesting problem. But is it really the right problem to solve? I don’t think so. Currently we have:

>other unpredictable human-driven vehicles on the road

>no sensors or passive/active guides in the physical infrastructure — guidance is completely determined onboard

>no signage designed for CV — everything written in plain English, so you have to waste compute on object detection and OCR. And, you have a constant and unending need to collect mapping data

>no vehicle-to-vehicle communication whatsoever

Design the roads and signage for self driving cars, enforce an industry-wide V2V standard with NHTSA, and start small in some test areas that only allow other vehicles that are part of the botnet (perhaps not necessarily self-driving, but at least part of the V2V network). That’s a reasonable problem space. The current one is unworkable — the models won’t converge and they’ll never make it out of “beta”.

So you intend to ban bicycles from those areas? Because bikes are never going to have reliable V2V communication.

Sometimes you can't even refactor software like they do neighborhoods.

I mean refactoring production software is no easy feat either