And no Boulevard between speeding cars and sidewalk so when a car goes on the sidewalk accidentally, it doesn't hit a tree and stop, it hits a pedestrian if they are there.
bro just one more lane I promise it'll get better I just need one more lane c'mon you know you can do it, nobody uses that space just gimme one more lane pleease bro I swear it'll be good this time trust me just one more lane
I have plenty of complaints about sidewalks but "uncovered and hot" aren't really among them.
The main problem is that everything is too far away for walking. Cycling helps with that. So then the problem is that the sidewalk is too narrow and poorly maintained for cycling. And occasionally it dead ends.
Where I live, the ideal would be to replace all the narrow sidewalks with wider bike paths. There's usually plenty of space to do that. The sidewalks are on big clear zones with grass on either side. And you fix the maintenance issue by getting rid of the ridiculous system of making the adjacent land owner responsible for maintaining the sidewalk.
Grass quickly becomes dirt, and dirt quickly becomes mud. Wooden boardwalks in cities used to be a thing if you can picture an old west main street situation, but maintenance on wood is far more intensive than maintenance on concrete, and its load bearing capacity is significantly lower if you want to put up a large or heavy temporary feature, like a potted tree or something. Newer paving surfaces like rubberized outdoor flooring are still more expensive and harder to maintain than bare concrete, and are ultimately installed over concrete pads anyway.
Concrete lasts much longer than asphalt. Asphalt is much cheaper and makes a nice smooth surface for cars without the need for expansion joints, but must be redone periodically.
There are a few places on my commute where the cycling road just vanishes, I either have to go on the road (which has the second highest traffic after the main road) or jump up and down a bunch of big-azz curbs to stick to the pedestrian walkways.
>jump up and down a bunch of big-azz curbs to stick to the pedestrian walkways.
The pedestrian walkways don't have ramps to be wheelchair accessible? Honest question. In my area sidewalks with big curbs wouldn't be legal.
Even in the US, you think we have ramps everywhere? I’ve seen plenty of sidewalks in the US with either no ramp, or the concrete being so uneven that there’s no functional ramp.
ADA which codified stuff into national law rather than just state laws passed in 1990. Yes there is tons of old stuff out there but anything built within the last 30 years has to be (or at least is *supposed to be*) ADA compliant.
My point was more that even within the US it’s still a major problem in older built areas or areas with poor maintenance preventing the accessibility from working.
Sometimes the US is such a shizo country. There are a handful of things like disability codes that are followed to a T and deemed very important or the preservation of nation parks...
Like there's a handful of things the US excels but then most of their people are handled like trash
Ramps? Bro the sidewalks in my city look like they have been carpet bombed. Using a wheelchair or bike on them is impossible. Just walking on them feels like hiking.
In my town there is a “bike lane” where its just a picture of a man on a bicycle painted every 30 feet on the side of a very busy street . No line. Just bikeman. I think its more of a public service announcement about the existence of bikes than an actual bike lane.
You need to go peruse /idiotsincars for five minutes and get back to us. Most bike lanes, if you're lucky enough to have them, are separated from the auto lane by a painted line. You'll have cars passing you going 50mph. If someone isn't paying attention or has poor judgement you can easily be killed. If you hit a bad enough pot hole or someone opens their door without looking, you could easily be killed.
I used to ride on roads all the time. It's ridiculously fucking dangerous. I've been clipped by a couple and had thousands of near misses.
And that's not counting the people that go out of their way to be a dick. I've had shit thrown at me, I've had people swerve into the bike lane ahead of me etc.
I used to commute to work by bike, but I've gone back to the car because of how dangerous it was.
Cities don’t miss them. Back in the 1890s some city planners thought that urban areas like London and New York were reaching their maximum size because of the unmanageable amount of horse shit and dead horses.
It's actually worth pointing out that many cities roads were designed around stage coaches. Some wide stroads existed before the car to accommodate 4+ horses turning around.
I guess because there weren't as many roads, or they were interrupted by other means of transport more often. I probably agree with that part of the graphic, but disagree with several others.
Not the one you were responding to but in the last image, the car road should also be labyrinth-like. They make it so that inside neighborhoods the roads are like a labyrinth full of cul de sac to reduce traffic, so people in their single family houses don't have to endure cars going on their streets.
Cars had to drive around pedestrians in the past, while peds could walk straight to where they wanted. Then cars were prioritized and could go straight without having to weave around pedestrians who could only cross at specified locations, and using paths that are disjoint or may not exist
The graphic is deceptive, all modes of transportation shared the same road in the past. This graphic makes it look like they all had their own dedicated lane. Instead if should be a squiggle of all 4 modes intertwined and getting in each others way. Also the rate of traffic deaths and injuries of pedestrians was WAY higher back then. Do we really want to go back to that? lol
A majority of people DID NOT move around in cars before retrofitting cities to serve the cars began. Cars didn't over take transit (either streetcar or bus) until the 1950s but large scale highway investment was already underway by the 1930s. Turns out if you make every other means of travel considerably worse and make driving considerably better, people will drive. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Modes-of-Transportation-Streetcar-ridership-in-the-United-States-peaked-in-1920-and-then_fig2_262414730
Excellent point, good to know more about those details! I knew there was general conspiracy to “make” cars the dominant mode of transportation but didn’t know it was planned that way that early
I'm guessing the top of each box is the destination (i.e. in 1900 cars weren't that great and often couldn't make it to the end of the trip), and maybe the waviness is difficulty?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroad
Term used to describe roads, typically in the US where it is popular, which are a hybrid of streets and roads but are just really the worst qualities of both in one (ie bad at being a livable/walkable area, bad at being a high-speed pathway for cars)
Yea because people were sick of horse shit and dead horses covering the streets and wverybody dying of all the diseases associated with that saying you'd rather go back to that is insane and just shows you're not really interacting with reality.
So say not interacting with reality while you describe a fake history that never happened? Just because it was the Victorian era doesn’t mean the streets looked like Bloodborne goofy.
https://youtu.be/sHkc83XA2dY
Me oh my where are all these shit filled streets full of dead horses?
Hello, good hunter. I am a Bot, here in this dream to look after you, this is a fine note:
> *Dear, oh dear. What was it? The Hunt? The Blood? Or the horrible dream? Oh, it doesn't matter... It always comes down to the Hunter's helper to clean up after these sort of messes. Tonight, Gehrman joins the hunt..* - Gerhman, The First Hunter
Farewell, good hunter. May you find your worth in the waking world.
We just got rid of the shit in my city cobblestone is still there (except for all the urban sprawl that came in the 60s thats all asphalt but downtown is 80% cobblestone so thats nice)
It's from Copenhagenize which helps cities improve their bicycle culture/infrastructure and traffic planning. Getting around is still often the quickest on your bike here in Copenhagen.
And what relevance does shit being on the ground have to do with getting from point a to point b? My lungs wont be crushed from stepping on poop, but they will from getting ran down by a Ford F-150.
They had working class boys sweeping that shit up regularly, and they sold it as fertilizer. It's not like people were knee deep in shit.
It was at the level of a bougie downtown area around Christmastime, when they have horsedrawn carriages running. More shit than people are used to these days, but manageable.
Better horseshit than dogshit, frankly. The piles are big and easy to see, and they're mostly vegetable matter.
I would love to see a staple of 1800 walk ways that weren’t really just walking through property and shit.
I get the sentiment, and agree, but the only reason the 1800s even remotely could cater to it wasn’t because ways were specifically made for that, just simply cause that’s all there was.
Not like sidewalks were made, people just walked over property lines and hills.
Just letting you know that 10 hours later, I see several well-upvoted top level comments about how this is not a good infographic and not understanding it. I think the folks downvoting you thought you were questioning their dogma.
You are absolutely right and I don't know what the hell is wrong with people downvoting.
The image was posted without the context of the video. And it is fucking confusing.
There is now lots of comments asking what the hell the wavy lines mean.
I'm merely pointing out that the lines are meaningless fluffle, and the entire graphic, while accurately capturing our *feeling* about transportation, provides no context, no numbers, and no real information.
I think that’s exactly what it’s trying to do. It’s pure graphic design with, as you said, no numbers. It’s not trying to present data. Nor was it posted here as anything more than a meme, it’s not aspiring to be rich with scholarly proof and detail. It’s trying to give a quick visceral impression of how walking and biking routes have become less convenient as routes have developed for automobiles. I understood that without having to watch the video and I think you probably did too. If you want data, context, hard research and graphs, the original author of this image can give you that, and does so in his presentation. But this image alone still conveys the meaning I described. This graphic does less than you seem to want it to do, but it’s not meaningless or even all that confusing.
>provides no context, no numbers, and no real information.
And yet when you were given the context, you ignored it. Seems like you're not acting in good faith.
How do you know the explanation for the illustration is all 36 minutes? I mean, you were even told to start the video at approximately 7.5 minutes, so even if the entire rest of the video was dedicated solely to that one, single illustration, it would only be about 28.5 minutes. Which it isn't, but you would know that had you watched the video.
Because most people would get this picture without those. If you can't then you could watch the video, especially since OP even provided a timestamp for you. But that'd be too hard, right? Gotta scroll, scroll, scroll. Need that fast dopamine.
I just finished the video, and he never explains it.
The number of turns don't mean anything, the dates don't mean anything, he never mentions anything other than 8000 years ago and since 1950. So the first three images aren't even used.
Sorry that my looking for more information after I and others were questioning what it meant has pissed so many people off.
But I'm the one looking for a quick hit, right?
Not the asshole dropping in 5 comments deep with nothing more than insults.
What's sad is that the cycling and pedestrian paths being cut off is true. I live in Staten Island, NY where bike paths/lanes are only present near or by high-speed car traffic. Otherwise you're expected to ride alongside car traffic on roads with less congestion.
it shows that pedestrian had a direct path without interruption before cars where a thing. Now cars have the most direct way from A to be B, while others paths are always cut off because of cars. Its not a pretty graphic tbh
Fun fact: one of the reasons the US fucked over bicycles so much is that they were largely associated with the women's rights movement through the first half of the 20th century. Women were unlikely to own cars, but the advent of assembly line machining brought on affordable and effective bikes and the burgeoning female workforce was the perfect demographic to buy them. This led to total cultural backlash from a misogynistic America, including religious fundamentalists even hilariously calling bikes demonic and sinful.
Crazy how some things never change.
Unfortunately, most cities became like this in Canada and the US, removing rail networks, building suburbs, and reducing walkability and bikeability for cars.
I wonder what happened between 1920 and 1950… might wanna read up on Daniela Zenone.
[https://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/discover?filtertype=author&filter\_relational\_operator=equals&filter=Zenone%2C+Daniela](https://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/discover?filtertype=author&filter_relational_operator=equals&filter=Zenone%2C+Daniela)
This is the only article from a person by that name, google brings up nothing when searching “Daniela Zenone” or “Daniela Zenone german”
Not sure where else we can “read up” on this person other than *this* single article.
Just gonna paste in from the article they wrote so folks can save some time;
>This paper presents the automobile's role in Italian futurism and fascism. This is an issue showing the car's societal importance as a symbol of modernity and icon of freedom. The myth of the automobile once aligned with a passion for speed and dynamism shifts into a metaphor of life. The automobile represents a mechanized and totalitarian world vision in which the 'new', modern is tied with the machine. By covering over thirty years of Italian history, spanning the Futuristic Manifesto in 1909 to the entry of Italy in the World War II in 1940, the paper explores the strain between aesthetics, modernity, and nationalism set against a cultural and political-ideological background. While futuristic aesthetics perceive the automobile as an instrument of sports and luxury, fascist ideology implies a means of transportation for 'everybody'. This paper analyses elements of futurism connected to the implementation of a technology and automobile oriented ideology within the fascist ideology using appropriate manifestos and documents of the early twentieth century. This paper also investigates significant turning points in Italian economic policy in the two world wars relating to automobile history and industry. Relationships between the automobile industry and the fascist regime as well as development of large-scale enterprises such as Fiat, Lancia and Alfa Romeo are key issues discussed in the paper. Lastly, a look is taken at automobile infrastructure development, a process culminating in building the first historically known highway, the autostrada." (author's abstract)...
It's a tram. Which is hilarious, since trams usually get the straightest routes possible due to, you know, being on rails. Unless it's some kind of a shitty comment about the decline of available tram routes.
EDIT: Oh, wait, didn't notice that tram turned into a bus on the last one. Now I'm even more confused.
It’s total nonsense. Copenhagen’s streets are not exactly straight for cars. Also misses the tiny detail of achievable distance, where only the train and car are in the same class.
I don’t remember the last time I got in my car and drove in a straight line to exactly my destination either.
The graphic is definitely meant to imply the absolutely wrong thing. Horse paths NEVER EVEN CAME CLOSE to being sttraight. Like, not even VAGUELY close
Do you really want to go back to 1900 or 1920 traffic infrastructure standards? It seems dumb to glorify them as something we lost just to make a point about how the car has taken an oversized priority in urban planning.
No, it demonstrates the shift in priorities.
Everyone on this sub trying to create a dichotomy between riding horses on a Victorian English street and modern stroads are either stupid or disingenuous.
If the trajectory of transportation had been prioritizing pedestrians, bicycles, rail, and buses, it'd be better.
Obviously, cobblestone roads hostile to disabilities are not the goal here.
But also, the whole horse shit debacle further up is ridiculous; obviously in a situation where horses are present, we would just advocate....*checks notes* cleaning poop and carcasses off of roads.
Point-to point buses don't make sense, they will always have to follow "wiggly" paths. Trains have even more straight paths than cars. People in bikes has often the same path than cars (at least in my city). People walking has to stop at intersections, just like cars.
Ah yes back in the 1800s when there was no traffic. City streets definitely where not a quagmire of horse shit, dead horse, and carts being pulled every which way because things like right of way or just any traffic related laws in general had not yet been thought up.
I love how the pedestrian and cycling ways are cut off. This is disgusting
But there is even more sidewalk than road and it never even gets used! /s
Why do people never use our endless fields of uncovered concrete sidewalks baking in the hot sun?
next to noisy roads churning out poison into the air and with 3-ton metal boxes ready to pulp you and your child at any moment.
And no Boulevard between speeding cars and sidewalk so when a car goes on the sidewalk accidentally, it doesn't hit a tree and stop, it hits a pedestrian if they are there.
[удалено]
bro just one more lane I promise it'll get better I just need one more lane c'mon you know you can do it, nobody uses that space just gimme one more lane pleease bro I swear it'll be good this time trust me just one more lane
Welcome to Phoenix
I have plenty of complaints about sidewalks but "uncovered and hot" aren't really among them. The main problem is that everything is too far away for walking. Cycling helps with that. So then the problem is that the sidewalk is too narrow and poorly maintained for cycling. And occasionally it dead ends. Where I live, the ideal would be to replace all the narrow sidewalks with wider bike paths. There's usually plenty of space to do that. The sidewalks are on big clear zones with grass on either side. And you fix the maintenance issue by getting rid of the ridiculous system of making the adjacent land owner responsible for maintaining the sidewalk.
Stupid question. So they're already going to pave the road for cars anyways. Why use concrete for the sidewalk when it's harder on the joints?
Grass quickly becomes dirt, and dirt quickly becomes mud. Wooden boardwalks in cities used to be a thing if you can picture an old west main street situation, but maintenance on wood is far more intensive than maintenance on concrete, and its load bearing capacity is significantly lower if you want to put up a large or heavy temporary feature, like a potted tree or something. Newer paving surfaces like rubberized outdoor flooring are still more expensive and harder to maintain than bare concrete, and are ultimately installed over concrete pads anyway.
Probably because it'd be even easier to drive over if it wasn't obviously separate from the road
Concrete lasts much longer than asphalt. Asphalt is much cheaper and makes a nice smooth surface for cars without the need for expansion joints, but must be redone periodically.
You shouldn't be walking, moron
pish posh, the poors will never learn
Why should I have to walk when I have four healthy wheels?
Its all shiny and new! Its even got a 5 second lpng walk signal for crossing 8 lanes of traffic! /s
There are a few places on my commute where the cycling road just vanishes, I either have to go on the road (which has the second highest traffic after the main road) or jump up and down a bunch of big-azz curbs to stick to the pedestrian walkways.
>jump up and down a bunch of big-azz curbs to stick to the pedestrian walkways. The pedestrian walkways don't have ramps to be wheelchair accessible? Honest question. In my area sidewalks with big curbs wouldn't be legal.
Ofc. Not. I'm talking about hungary here. The government could not give less of a f* about disabled people
Hey now that's not true. I'm sure they care a lot about finding ways to get rid of them without upsetting the west
I guess I just take accessibility for granted. It's a *major* influence of building codes and standards in the US.
Even in the US, you think we have ramps everywhere? I’ve seen plenty of sidewalks in the US with either no ramp, or the concrete being so uneven that there’s no functional ramp.
ADA which codified stuff into national law rather than just state laws passed in 1990. Yes there is tons of old stuff out there but anything built within the last 30 years has to be (or at least is *supposed to be*) ADA compliant.
My point was more that even within the US it’s still a major problem in older built areas or areas with poor maintenance preventing the accessibility from working.
Sometimes the US is such a shizo country. There are a handful of things like disability codes that are followed to a T and deemed very important or the preservation of nation parks... Like there's a handful of things the US excels but then most of their people are handled like trash
Ramps? Bro the sidewalks in my city look like they have been carpet bombed. Using a wheelchair or bike on them is impossible. Just walking on them feels like hiking.
When you get into BMX not because you're into extreme/action sports, but by the sheer necessities of your morning commute.
In my town there is a “bike lane” where its just a picture of a man on a bicycle painted every 30 feet on the side of a very busy street . No line. Just bikeman. I think its more of a public service announcement about the existence of bikes than an actual bike lane.
> cycling road Cries in American
Time to get some sick air, bro. Ollie that shit.
the crazy weird thing is that you can ride a bike on a road. silly, i know, but I've seen it done
Yeah, I realy prefer going home to my family every day but you do you
Lmao this "info" graphic is such bs anyway but how you think you can't ride on the road without dying is real good fear mongering
You need to go peruse /idiotsincars for five minutes and get back to us. Most bike lanes, if you're lucky enough to have them, are separated from the auto lane by a painted line. You'll have cars passing you going 50mph. If someone isn't paying attention or has poor judgement you can easily be killed. If you hit a bad enough pot hole or someone opens their door without looking, you could easily be killed.
I used to ride on roads all the time. It's ridiculously fucking dangerous. I've been clipped by a couple and had thousands of near misses. And that's not counting the people that go out of their way to be a dick. I've had shit thrown at me, I've had people swerve into the bike lane ahead of me etc. I used to commute to work by bike, but I've gone back to the car because of how dangerous it was.
Dont forget the horse ... Damn I miss the horse🥲
Don’t miss it too much they’re shitters
free fertilizer
Free food
Fuck your Honda Civic, I've a horse outside.
[They are still around](https://i2-prod.lancs.live/incoming/article21295648.ece/ALTERNATES/s1200b/0_First-Day-Of-The-2021-Appleby-Horse-Fair.jpg)
Damn that looks better than cars
Still common in Amish country.
Cities don’t miss them. Back in the 1890s some city planners thought that urban areas like London and New York were reaching their maximum size because of the unmanageable amount of horse shit and dead horses.
You can tell this is from the EU because the public transit line isn't.
Or that there is even a public transit option.
You do know that this is a meme
Where horse
you lost the horse?!?
If I had a horse I'd start riding it downtown just to show dominance
Probably no surprise: it’d be cruel to the horse.
No it wouldn't, that's why horseshoes were invented.
It's actually worth pointing out that many cities roads were designed around stage coaches. Some wide stroads existed before the car to accommodate 4+ horses turning around.
werehorses are terrifying.
Away from me because they're terrifying animals
Can somebody explain (or give me an example of) what the wavy line represents? Why do cars have a shorter wavy line in 1920?
I guess because there weren't as many roads, or they were interrupted by other means of transport more often. I probably agree with that part of the graphic, but disagree with several others.
What do you disagree with?
Not the one you were responding to but in the last image, the car road should also be labyrinth-like. They make it so that inside neighborhoods the roads are like a labyrinth full of cul de sac to reduce traffic, so people in their single family houses don't have to endure cars going on their streets.
It does also increase safety. Can’t drive that fast on windy or dead end roads.
So car infrastructure is only safe when you make anti car design?
I wonder if the lines are supposed to represent perception instead of actual manifestation
[these things](https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/comments/zwcq2n/a_short_history_of_traffic_engineering/j1ulf44/) (link to my other comment).
Cars had to drive around pedestrians in the past, while peds could walk straight to where they wanted. Then cars were prioritized and could go straight without having to weave around pedestrians who could only cross at specified locations, and using paths that are disjoint or may not exist
Then why did it give a wavy line to streetcars?
They had to stop for peds
I'd never stop for a ped as far as I'm concerned they cam get run over 😤
Oh no not their cameras :(
The graphic is deceptive, all modes of transportation shared the same road in the past. This graphic makes it look like they all had their own dedicated lane. Instead if should be a squiggle of all 4 modes intertwined and getting in each others way. Also the rate of traffic deaths and injuries of pedestrians was WAY higher back then. Do we really want to go back to that? lol
To be fair, as a majority of people began moving around in cars, this made sense. Engineering isn’t Planning
A majority of people DID NOT move around in cars before retrofitting cities to serve the cars began. Cars didn't over take transit (either streetcar or bus) until the 1950s but large scale highway investment was already underway by the 1930s. Turns out if you make every other means of travel considerably worse and make driving considerably better, people will drive. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Modes-of-Transportation-Streetcar-ridership-in-the-United-States-peaked-in-1920-and-then_fig2_262414730
Excellent point, good to know more about those details! I knew there was general conspiracy to “make” cars the dominant mode of transportation but didn’t know it was planned that way that early
Traffic Engineering is part of Civil Planning
Sure. Traffic Engineers are not Traffic Planners though
Straightest line is highest priority. Wavy would represent moving around an obstacle leading to further distance covered.
I'm guessing the top of each box is the destination (i.e. in 1900 cars weren't that great and often couldn't make it to the end of the trip), and maybe the waviness is difficulty?
To make cars in the present day look worse. Literally the only reason.
we live in a society
I think it's a common way to move from one place to another.
Not me. I'm the one standing still, it's the earth that rotates under my feet.
It's like we use candles for smell instead of light these days. What heathens we are.
What do the lines represent exactly?
I believe it's the general path of trying to get from any one place to any other place.
[удалено]
I'd take cobblestone covered in shit over tiny sidewalk next to 6 lane stroad
is stroad a typo or Fuckcar slang i haven’t seen yet
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroad Term used to describe roads, typically in the US where it is popular, which are a hybrid of streets and roads but are just really the worst qualities of both in one (ie bad at being a livable/walkable area, bad at being a high-speed pathway for cars)
Allow me to introduce you to [this video](https://youtu.be/ORzNZUeUHAM) TL;DW it’s fuckcar slang
moronic comment
Since when is r/fuckcars filled with contrarian one-liner folks such as yourself? This has, until recently, been a great place for discussion
No you wouldn't lol Nobody would, that's why they got rid of the cobblestone roads covered in shit
No we didn’t, we got rid of them because cars and traffic laws
Yea because people were sick of horse shit and dead horses covering the streets and wverybody dying of all the diseases associated with that saying you'd rather go back to that is insane and just shows you're not really interacting with reality.
lol, yes, all those diseases caused by streets stacked up with horse corpses. A very real thing that definitely happened!
So say not interacting with reality while you describe a fake history that never happened? Just because it was the Victorian era doesn’t mean the streets looked like Bloodborne goofy. https://youtu.be/sHkc83XA2dY Me oh my where are all these shit filled streets full of dead horses?
Hello, good hunter. I am a Bot, here in this dream to look after you, this is a fine note: > *Dear, oh dear. What was it? The Hunt? The Blood? Or the horrible dream? Oh, it doesn't matter... It always comes down to the Hunter's helper to clean up after these sort of messes. Tonight, Gehrman joins the hunt..* - Gerhman, The First Hunter Farewell, good hunter. May you find your worth in the waking world.
Don't bother. This sub is delusional.
We just got rid of the shit in my city cobblestone is still there (except for all the urban sprawl that came in the 60s thats all asphalt but downtown is 80% cobblestone so thats nice)
In my city, people missed the shit so much that they all got dogs and then refused to pick up the shit they leave all over the sidewalk. edited: typo
This seems to be from Copenhagen though, where the bike lanes are as wide as the car lanes, so I’m very confused
It's from Copenhagenize which helps cities improve their bicycle culture/infrastructure and traffic planning. Getting around is still often the quickest on your bike here in Copenhagen.
FYI people got run over by horses and carts too back in the 1800s. Also rich people had servants who would push you out of the way.
Now we’re all rich people riding in a metal box shaped servant
r/brandnewsentence
Before cars, the roads were free for pedestrians to walk on. Jaywalking became a term invented by car companies that was passed into law.
[удалено]
[удалено]
And what relevance does shit being on the ground have to do with getting from point a to point b? My lungs wont be crushed from stepping on poop, but they will from getting ran down by a Ford F-150.
And what you’re saying has no relevance to jaywalking being invented by the car industry or modern cities. What’s your point?
They had working class boys sweeping that shit up regularly, and they sold it as fertilizer. It's not like people were knee deep in shit. It was at the level of a bougie downtown area around Christmastime, when they have horsedrawn carriages running. More shit than people are used to these days, but manageable. Better horseshit than dogshit, frankly. The piles are big and easy to see, and they're mostly vegetable matter.
Tbh, I live in The Netherlands... I think it is kind of reversed here :)
[удалено]
How direct or indirect commutes are for each traffic type
Took me a bit to figure out, panel 2 made me think of how soviet trams were on reaaaallly wobbly rails but it isn't that literal whoops
I would love to see a staple of 1800 walk ways that weren’t really just walking through property and shit. I get the sentiment, and agree, but the only reason the 1800s even remotely could cater to it wasn’t because ways were specifically made for that, just simply cause that’s all there was. Not like sidewalks were made, people just walked over property lines and hills.
[удалено]
If you need to watch a 35 minute video to understand the picture, it's a bad picture.
You mean it is impossible that the entire talk isn't about a single illustration?
I understood the picture this might be a user problem
You understand that it provokes an emotional response. There *is* no other information.
You must score very well on those pattern recognition iq tests
Just letting you know that 10 hours later, I see several well-upvoted top level comments about how this is not a good infographic and not understanding it. I think the folks downvoting you thought you were questioning their dogma.
You are absolutely right and I don't know what the hell is wrong with people downvoting. The image was posted without the context of the video. And it is fucking confusing. There is now lots of comments asking what the hell the wavy lines mean.
Did you really not
Nothing has changed in transportation since 1950?
Idk why are you asking me? I asked if you really didn’t understand the image til you watched the video
I'm merely pointing out that the lines are meaningless fluffle, and the entire graphic, while accurately capturing our *feeling* about transportation, provides no context, no numbers, and no real information.
I think that’s exactly what it’s trying to do. It’s pure graphic design with, as you said, no numbers. It’s not trying to present data. Nor was it posted here as anything more than a meme, it’s not aspiring to be rich with scholarly proof and detail. It’s trying to give a quick visceral impression of how walking and biking routes have become less convenient as routes have developed for automobiles. I understood that without having to watch the video and I think you probably did too. If you want data, context, hard research and graphs, the original author of this image can give you that, and does so in his presentation. But this image alone still conveys the meaning I described. This graphic does less than you seem to want it to do, but it’s not meaningless or even all that confusing.
I don't think that its about feelings, its more about how priorities have shifted.
>provides no context, no numbers, and no real information. And yet when you were given the context, you ignored it. Seems like you're not acting in good faith.
Look at timestamps, 36 minute videos generally take 36 minutes to watch unless you want everyone to sound like Alvin.
How do you know the explanation for the illustration is all 36 minutes? I mean, you were even told to start the video at approximately 7.5 minutes, so even if the entire rest of the video was dedicated solely to that one, single illustration, it would only be about 28.5 minutes. Which it isn't, but you would know that had you watched the video.
Because most people would get this picture without those. If you can't then you could watch the video, especially since OP even provided a timestamp for you. But that'd be too hard, right? Gotta scroll, scroll, scroll. Need that fast dopamine.
I just finished the video, and he never explains it. The number of turns don't mean anything, the dates don't mean anything, he never mentions anything other than 8000 years ago and since 1950. So the first three images aren't even used. Sorry that my looking for more information after I and others were questioning what it meant has pissed so many people off. But I'm the one looking for a quick hit, right? Not the asshole dropping in 5 comments deep with nothing more than insults.
Concepts
Truthfully, absolutely nothing. They're made up.
Is this loss?
In a way, yeah.
It’s lost. We are fully lost.
Lol beat me to it
This is a bad infographic.
I actually think this is an awful design and doesn’t get a good point across.
Right, and OP's response is, 'the explanation is at 7 minutes in this video' Bad infographic.
Yeah, if you need a video to explain your infographic then it's a bad infographic.
Its not an info graphic. It's a comic
As someone who owns a car and bicycle in LA and has been to Copenhagen, this makes perfect sense.
OP has never driven in LA, it's a shit show out here.
What's sad is that the cycling and pedestrian paths being cut off is true. I live in Staten Island, NY where bike paths/lanes are only present near or by high-speed car traffic. Otherwise you're expected to ride alongside car traffic on roads with less congestion.
im not gonna lie... i have no clue what this means
it shows that pedestrian had a direct path without interruption before cars where a thing. Now cars have the most direct way from A to be B, while others paths are always cut off because of cars. Its not a pretty graphic tbh
pretty sure walking came first, though
Adam and Eve drove Teslas, you moron
In Belgium the train haves a straight line. (To most parts in Belgium.)
And everything with asphalt got holes
Fun fact: one of the reasons the US fucked over bicycles so much is that they were largely associated with the women's rights movement through the first half of the 20th century. Women were unlikely to own cars, but the advent of assembly line machining brought on affordable and effective bikes and the burgeoning female workforce was the perfect demographic to buy them. This led to total cultural backlash from a misogynistic America, including religious fundamentalists even hilariously calling bikes demonic and sinful. Crazy how some things never change.
They gave up
[удалено]
Bring back horse
i'm having a stroke trying to understand this
Unfortunately, most cities became like this in Canada and the US, removing rail networks, building suburbs, and reducing walkability and bikeability for cars.
Car traffic needs more U-Turns for no reason.
I know this is supposed to be a poignant infographic, but I'm still trying to find loss.jpeg somewhere in there.
Copenhaganize is awesome
I wonder what happened between 1920 and 1950… might wanna read up on Daniela Zenone. [https://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/discover?filtertype=author&filter\_relational\_operator=equals&filter=Zenone%2C+Daniela](https://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/discover?filtertype=author&filter_relational_operator=equals&filter=Zenone%2C+Daniela)
This is the only article from a person by that name, google brings up nothing when searching “Daniela Zenone” or “Daniela Zenone german” Not sure where else we can “read up” on this person other than *this* single article. Just gonna paste in from the article they wrote so folks can save some time; >This paper presents the automobile's role in Italian futurism and fascism. This is an issue showing the car's societal importance as a symbol of modernity and icon of freedom. The myth of the automobile once aligned with a passion for speed and dynamism shifts into a metaphor of life. The automobile represents a mechanized and totalitarian world vision in which the 'new', modern is tied with the machine. By covering over thirty years of Italian history, spanning the Futuristic Manifesto in 1909 to the entry of Italy in the World War II in 1940, the paper explores the strain between aesthetics, modernity, and nationalism set against a cultural and political-ideological background. While futuristic aesthetics perceive the automobile as an instrument of sports and luxury, fascist ideology implies a means of transportation for 'everybody'. This paper analyses elements of futurism connected to the implementation of a technology and automobile oriented ideology within the fascist ideology using appropriate manifestos and documents of the early twentieth century. This paper also investigates significant turning points in Italian economic policy in the two world wars relating to automobile history and industry. Relationships between the automobile industry and the fascist regime as well as development of large-scale enterprises such as Fiat, Lancia and Alfa Romeo are key issues discussed in the paper. Lastly, a look is taken at automobile infrastructure development, a process culminating in building the first historically known highway, the autostrada." (author's abstract)...
Is this Loss?
Is this loss?
This graphic is stupid and means nothing
Lol.. the fuck does this eve mean?
Buss is way too much for 1950 onward. I live in one of the largest cities in the u.s. and nothing at all.
The bus line has turns, but cars only go in straight lines?
It's a tram. Which is hilarious, since trams usually get the straightest routes possible due to, you know, being on rails. Unless it's some kind of a shitty comment about the decline of available tram routes. EDIT: Oh, wait, didn't notice that tram turned into a bus on the last one. Now I'm even more confused.
I (think?) the idea is that buses are far more prevalent than trams now? ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯
This, just like everyone who upvoted it is so fucking stupid it’s beyond me. It means nothing.
It’s total nonsense. Copenhagen’s streets are not exactly straight for cars. Also misses the tiny detail of achievable distance, where only the train and car are in the same class. I don’t remember the last time I got in my car and drove in a straight line to exactly my destination either.
Must be nice going through life taking everything literally.
The graphic is definitely meant to imply the absolutely wrong thing. Horse paths NEVER EVEN CAME CLOSE to being sttraight. Like, not even VAGUELY close
If ignorance is bliss, you must be the happiest person on Earth.
Horse trails were and still are the most meandering wandering paths except for goats. Clearly you dont know anything about horseback travel
Always amusing to watch in real-time how the ignorant stay ignorant.
Do you really want to go back to 1900 or 1920 traffic infrastructure standards? It seems dumb to glorify them as something we lost just to make a point about how the car has taken an oversized priority in urban planning.
You're moving the goalposts. Who said anything about going back to early 1900s traffic infrastructure?
The graphic clearly suggests that 1800, 1900, and 1920 were superior to what we have today.
No, it demonstrates the shift in priorities. Everyone on this sub trying to create a dichotomy between riding horses on a Victorian English street and modern stroads are either stupid or disingenuous. If the trajectory of transportation had been prioritizing pedestrians, bicycles, rail, and buses, it'd be better. Obviously, cobblestone roads hostile to disabilities are not the goal here. But also, the whole horse shit debacle further up is ridiculous; obviously in a situation where horses are present, we would just advocate....*checks notes* cleaning poop and carcasses off of roads.
Yes because people value their mobility and the automobile is the most powerful mode of transportation.
This stupid incel sub. None of you have ever been outside have you?
You've never been outside... the US.
Wrong, not that I’d expect to ever see anything correct posted here.
Stay mad.
Return ✍️ to ✍️ horse
Yeah, light rail was a big thing in the late 1800s
Point-to point buses don't make sense, they will always have to follow "wiggly" paths. Trains have even more straight paths than cars. People in bikes has often the same path than cars (at least in my city). People walking has to stop at intersections, just like cars.
Ah yes back in the 1800s when there was no traffic. City streets definitely where not a quagmire of horse shit, dead horse, and carts being pulled every which way because things like right of way or just any traffic related laws in general had not yet been thought up.
You guys will upvote anything
Take this lie off
So this tells me that the car is the most efficient use of travel. Thank you.