zlacker

It really says something. Roads have long served as our public space but we've managed to convert it into the private.

I don't mean materially private, I know we're fishbowls on wheels, but culturally private, as in people often refer to it as such.

It's one of the only times most people are disconnected from internet/work-tech because there is substantial risk of life and limb if they engaged (I know people have made this work regardless, I'm talking about cultures, not outliers)

Also this human need for privacy, if that's the reason to commute, is coming at the cost of literally destroying the planet.

There has to be a healthier way to satisfy these baseline psychological needs. Climate collapsing death machines may be how humans have transported themselves for a while but it shouldn't be the main go-to for how they are alone with their thoughts

>>kristo+(OP)
What if we didn't crowd ourselves into cesspools of humanity ie cities?

I'm being a bit facetious, but ultimately, this lack of privacy is all self-inflicted.

>>ndiscu+Yb
Then we'd probably destroy our ecosystem more quickly. People in cities much more efficiently than rural or suburban people.

>>kiesel+eh
Agreed. It seems with our current "world plan" (infinite growth to prop up the asset class), the only way forward is to push people into smaller and smaller boxes with less and less liberties.

Someday we'll be saying that travel is only for the rich - everyone else will be forced to use VR, and they will be brainwashed to like it. As they say, American lifestyles are only sustainable for the 1%. The rest of us should eat bugs and live in pods.

As we move into cities, production becomes cheaper - which means we produce more, which means we can support more people, which means we need to increase efficiency even more.

I'm not sure that this is preferable to life without technology. Aren't family and small moments the things that make life worth living? Squeezing out a few more years of expected lifespan hardly seems worth the tradeoff to me.

Personally, I don't think this is sustainable.

>>ndiscu+Yb
Cities offer privacy and anonymity. Smaller towns lack both. Dense urban areas with reasonably easy access to nature on public transport are fantastic resources which are missing in car oriented suburbs.

>>devdas+Rb5
Cities offer you anonymity from other "nobodies".

Rural areas offer anonymity from the state.

Both are declining because the scope of government is getting bigger and their capabilities get better. In practice this means that your upstairs neighbor in a city who just doesn't like your hair (or whatever) can likely find a reason to narc on you and in the country your magic mushroom grow op that nobody local cared about will be harassed by the government who formerly didn't have the means to care about what people in the countryside violating laws without bothering people were up to.

>>throwa+8x5
Rural areas don't offer you anonymity from the state either.

If your neighbours don't like you, they are likely to bring the state in. To be able to be that anonymous, you would need to be a few days commuting away from all individuals and offgrid.

In cities, the neighbour might not like you, but they don't have the time or energy to care about it. You need a reasonably big and dense city for this though.