Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Suburban housing is one of the most inefficient ways to build cities.

First, it's not quite true. Second, the most efficient way to build cities is a camp with bunk beds. I'm personally not looking for the most efficient place to live.

> Suburbs make everything car centric.

And?

The future is already here: Waymo in SF is the first example. In 10-15 years, Waymo (and its competitors) will solve the last disadvantages of car-centric life.

Want to go to a bar? Just press a button on your phone and a self-driving taxi will drive you there (and then back). Not yet old enough to drive a car? Waymo can drive you where needed, with a parent's authorization.

And you won't have to worry about missing the last bus, or to wait for the next one in the rain.

> Everything is far, services are more complex and expensive to offer, public transport non existent.

Public transit will die on its own. It's already stinking like it's been dead for a while.

And services in the suburbs are NOT generally more expensive. Quite the opposite. My favorite example: one mile of Manhattan subway now costs more than 1000 miles of 6-lane freeway.

> What you find comfortable I find terrible example of humans building golden walls around them at the expense of their own well being.

Dense cities are misery centrals.



I lived both in normal (not sure why you focusing on very dense ones) cities and suburbs, and I absolutely disagree.

Go to cities like Copenhagen or Amsterdam or many other great cities around Europe you can easily walk or bike through.

I don't want cities built around cars, whether it's waymo or FSD or you like to drive, they are congested hells. What you're describing is distopic hell of people interacting less and less.

Cities should be built around humans, not roads intermitted by buildings with endless parkings and traffic.

Public transit is only dead in US because all planning has focused on cars. Which is also the reason why you have so many hell holes and slums we don't. You can't afford a car, you can't even get to a job if you live in those suburbs.

I have nothing against people wanting to live in their own house, but the endless suburbs I've seen in US are just unlivable, they're again, perfect for people wanting to distance themselves from other human beings as much as possible.


> Go to cities like Copenhagen or Amsterdam or many other great cities around Europe you can easily walk or bike through.

I lived in Amsterdam. It's shit. Transit takes AGES to get you to the destination, so people have to use bikes. Which is NOT fun in winter at 6am in fog or rain.

And Copenhagen has a dirty little secret: it practices harsh population control. It's population is the same size now as in 1970-s. They successfully fended off densification and kept the city from degrading.

> Cities should be built around humans, not roads intermitted by buildings with endless parkings and traffic.

Indeed. We should build around humans, not public transit and bike lanes. And humans vastly prefer individual cars.

When there are equally valid options to use cars or bikes for commutes, around 95% of people prefer cars: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/sep/19/britains-1960...

> I have nothing against people wanting to live in their own house, but the endless suburbs I've seen in US are just unlivable

Really? That's why 85% of the US citizens want to live in 'unlivable' suburbs?


I'm fine to disagree.

Again, I lived in different places, including US, and I know what I don't want.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: