Re:Digital Minimalism
by Grombobulous on Saturday October 31, 2026 @12:29PM
(#50317594)
And similar to a phone, I don’t usually think that the answer is to just not own one at all.
I’m all for reducing trips and being more mindful about car dependency but I’m not personally going to sell my car because I can afford it and it makes my life better.
Are you imagining a modern society that developed without cars as being more of a burden to live in, or are you imagining the current society, developed with cars, as being more of a burden to live in when just getting rid of cars? Because yeah, getting rid of a car is going to make most people's lives harder. That's kind of what makes it a dependency.
Re:Digital Minimalism
by Grombobulous on Sunday November 01, 2026 @12:49PM
(#50327860)
When cars became popular, a lot of urban areas were developed under the assumption that all destinations would be reached by car from that point in time onward. There was no need to consider the idea that someone might not be able to or want to reach a destination without one.
I’m fine with cars being a beneficial convenience, an attainable luxury for the masses, but I think that any area with sufficient population (which isn’t very much) can support the idea of families being able to reach a significant percent of their daily destinations without a vehicle, and perhaps even preferring to do so.
It also saves a tremendous amount of resources and cost of living to reduce car trips per week per person by even a small amount.
When smartphones became popular, a lot of social functions developed under the assumption that all participants would have a smartphone, and have it with them at all times, connected. There has been no need to consider the idea that someone might want to participate without one.
You're arguing that car dependency is fine (for you). I'm arguing that car dependency is a good analogy for phone dependency.
So why do we do it? Because we can't imagine living without the convenience of our phones.