Uber/Lyft as one-stop shopping for all modes
 

Though we have had many threads discussing ride-sharing in the LCF forum, and some threads discussing bike-sharing; I don't think we have yet had a discussion about Uber/Lyft as a company involved with bike-sharing or any other mode. Now this article claims that Uber and Lyft want to become integrated platforms for multimodal transportation, the way Amazon is for online shopping. Is this a good or bad thing? Why and how? Discuss.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/03/b...e-sharing.html

The article, as the New York Times often does (and should be), is highly city centric, that is, the article is entirely devoted to public transport, hubs, cities, and last mile solutions such as scooters and bicycles.

It entirely neglects that huge suburban demographic.

My observation is cars will continue being the dominant form of transportation in cities.

Go to a public zoo during the weekend. Count how many Americans are having difficulty walking versus not having difficulty walking. Do you think those Americans can safely and comfortably ride anything else other than car?

That pretty much says it all.

But increasingly they’re betting on other modes of transportation — with the aim of becoming the only service people need to get around cities.

80% of the U.S. population lives in Urban areas...End of thread.

No no, that's not true at all, because urban and suburban are grouped together and treated as one by yours truly (I used to work for the Missouri Division of Tourism and now I work for the Missouri Office of Information).

A better guess is 25% urban, 50% suburban, and 25% rural, with urban being stacked residents and suburban being single-family detached homes.

There are only a few places like NYC, Chicago, Detroit, etc... that are densely urban. Phoenix, LA, St. Louis, really almost all cities, are actually heavily suburban.

Here's something to do if you really want to get depressed. Take a look at any major city (but also LA) with Google maps. Turn on satellite view. Then compare the space of off-street parking lots to "everything else". It's usually between 1/3 to 1/5 of the entire space of the city.

A satellite view of Detroit is enough to keep one depressed. How can you tell what is parking lot and what is bulldozed neighborhood. But I agree central urban centers are smaller than the larger metropolitan areas. That is what used to be called the Suburbs outside of down town. The Abandoned City of Detroit - Photography: Zach Fein

Detroit used to have close to 1.8 million people living in it during 1960s. They have less than half that many today. Not very dense I guess.

Cars are expensive motorized wheelchairs insulated from the elements. Transporting people who are disabled from using other forms of transportation is exactly what they should be used for.

I got my data from here. Urban being defined as 2500-50,000 or areas of 50,000 or more.

Anyway...TP's latest pipedream is only "maybe" applicable to large city centers...Chicago, LA, etc.

Yes.

I like the fact that I don't have arrive at work in the office as a big ball of sweat from riding my bike there when it 90 degrees and 100% humidity like it is today. The A/C works wonderful.

I like the fact that I don't have arrive at work in the office drenched from a rainstorm. The roof works wonderful.

I like the fact that I don't have arrive at work in the office freezing cold when it's 20 below zero. Not having frostbite is a wonderful thing. The heater works wonderful.

Ok, so you're against LCF, then. So why are you here? To attack and insult people who favor LCF?

The better question is "Why is the Living Car Free list still here?" when it has become nothing but a platform for one or two unique characters to broadcast or support bizarre pipe dreams, P&R rants, stream of consciousness ramblings, and proselytization for asceticism, all with little to no bicycling (or even reality based) content?

I cannot speak for others but this book is why I try to be almost car free. I'm not quite there yet but I did go through two months and only use half a tank of gas.

Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed: Revised Edition https://www.amazon.com/dp/B004H0M8EA/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_poppBbM1XPMNQ

There is an avalanche of evidence showing we've greatly exceeded pur carrying capacity. Even Fox news (!) has an article on the seriousness of global pollution.

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2018/06/19/nasas-chilling-30-year-old-warning.html

The LCF forum is important because it:
1. Offers compelling reasons as to why LCF is good for the long term survival of our species as well as short-term personal benefits. It answers the why of LCF.
2. Examines and exposes the obstacles to LCF, such as infrastructure, social mores, and human nature going against LCF.
3. Offers counter reasons and criticisms to LCF. It is in the best interest of our collective knowledge to take the merit of these counter arguments.

I argue that ultimately we want to change human behavior before Mother Nature forces changes, one way or another. Letting nature takes its course will result in a lot of misery.

Coming from a scientific background, I find it disconcerting that people post such highly emotional arguments here. It's highly inappropriate in any argument to call out someone without actually addressing their argument. If I find myself writing an an argument or a rebuttal that is devoid of "when, if, but, in order to, therefore, because, as if, whenever, usually, results in, etc..." then that's probably an excellent indication I'm spouting nonsense.

The word I like is convincing. When TandemPower lays out his paragraphs he is convincing.

You are not convincing because you dismiss, well, everything with a contemptuous political reference. Half the references you make are acronyms that I do not know. While your statements might have merit, it's hard to take them seriously because they are more akin to monkeys throwing excrement onto the tea-sipping gentlemen that are trying to have an adult conversation.

It might help us to make a post of "the Utopian world according to ILikeToBike". If such a post contains more references to exclude people with a 9mm promotion instead of how to make the world a better place, then that's probably a good indication of your political stance."

Enuff said. :rolleyes:

You are relatively new here so you can be given some slack. Follow the threads long enough and the highlighted and underlined portion of your post I quoted could be brought into question by some. Check out the posts from 254 down in the End of the auto industry thread. Just how convincing do you find that? I was once told by that someone that if I didn't understand something rather than dismissing it I could just ask for clarification. That sir simply isn't true.

As mentioned, you can change that any time, by posting content you consider more suitable.

I discovered Lelystad, in NL which was built on a blank parcel of recovered inland seabed

laid out the housing , so getting on your bike , and going out the back gate , the route was quite direct

Where if you went out the front door , and got in your car you encountered a maze of intersecting cul-de-sacs ..

so the town plan discouraged car use..

US of course trashed urban trolleys because the gas rubber and car/bus companies pushed them out, to privatize.
killing its opposition.. then suburbia was built around selling cars.

You need to visit the Huntington Library down here sometime. The Red Cars helped to create the Suburbs or at least expand them in the LA area. Once the Suburbs of the inland Empire and Orange county were well established the Red Cars couldn't expand to keep up. They were ripe for a take over. Some light reading. https://99percentinvisible.org/episo...ar-conspiracy/

I can't read the article (or don't want to) because of the limit on how many free NYT articles I can access a month.

Of course, all corporations are seeking to be monopolies, and in recent times, for many of them their business model has also involved them seeking to be subscription providers, where you use what is essentially their owned product, and pay on a continuing basis, rather than buying one big thing, which you now own, and maybe not buying again for a while or maybe not from them next time.

So if Uber or Lyft can get you to use their bikes and their cars, instead of your bike and your car, they know they will have a steady stream of income and you will be dependent on them rather than truly independent.

You'll also be continually exposed to their ads and continually providing them with your location and interests.

Of course it is so, after all Roger Rabbit said it, eh?

Try reading a little more than movie scripts for history lessons about transportation

You can start with the below and there is plenty more available on-line on this subject if you care to have your bubble burst on this issue.
Did Auto, Oil Conspiracy Put the Brakes on Trolleys?
https://la.curbed.com/2017/9/20/1634...general-motors

I think you hit paydirt with your last sentence. Obtaining personal data to sell to other businesses is probably also one the main interests Google also has in the development of autonomous cars besides selling the mapping technology or its products to others. Google has no interest in manufacturing or operating vehicle fleets.

Lyft and Uber have manged to rack up stupendous losses of money in all their transportation endeavors with no sign in sight of an end to their financial bleeding. Anyone who thinks that the bicycle business will turn things around for either should look into investing in Bridge Deeds.

you should read City of Quartz by Mike Davis,,Those Suburban developers, because the Red Line served the city, center (not their new developments ) were accusing it of being a use of public subsidies as Communistic..

Red Baiting The Red Line essentially.

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...0e79f46b1c.jpg

You can get a Rail map of the Red Line for the time period. The Yellow line was more city focused however. Davis association with the SDS makes me suspect on his truthfulness however. He has been caught making up things in some of his writings. He Grew up in one of the very Suburbs the Red Line serviced when he was born.

And one of those Suburban developers was Huntington to look for a place his workers could afford to live. But you are correct, or Davis to a degree developers and the city both accused each other of reaping the benefits. Still by the time the Pacific Electric was being torn down Traffic had slowed the Red Cars down to a crawl one they got to town.

Big companies have to explore things that are close to their core competencies. They have to explore the ecosystem around them - it's what big companies do - it's like an animal tasting the food in a new territory - is this good stuff, or is it poison?

I don't think Uber and Lyft can do bike sharing effectively. Those scooter companies are attacking from the bottom. Like pirañas eating a whale, they're going to win that fight.

How it that any different from using GPS in any other car? Is it because people can turn off location tracking when they are driving their own vehicle? How many people do that, though? Probably the same number of people who wrap their phones in tin foil to prevent them from being tracked.

To the surprise of absolutely no one, gmail is not private (even says so in the end user agreement). I posted google's rebuttal to give both sides a fair shake.

https://www.zdnet.com/google-amp/art...-apps-that-do/

While I do have a gmail account, I treat it as absolutely public information. I strongly urge others to do the same.

I'm not against it, but I live in reality and realize it's not a viable option to LCF. I't only viable to a certain geographic region of this country...Where it's warm weather year round and where work is a short commute.

Car Free / Car Lite boom has come and gone...

https://medium.com/@sjpeterson/livin...a-4df3e13a8b75