Google Maps Will Help You Avoid Crowded Mass Transit in Way More Cities (theverge.com) 40
Google is expanding the number of cities where Maps offers information about public transport crowding. The number of cities covered is increasing from around 200 today, to "over 10,000 transit agencies in 100 countries," the company says. As well as crowdedness, Google says Maps is also being updated to offer more information about past travel. From a report: Google Maps' crowdedness information originally launched pre-pandemic in 2019, but over the past year social distancing has made it more important than ever. Crowdedness information is generated from a mixture of historical location data, as well as self-reporting from Maps users on individual trains. Google says it anonymizes the location history data used. As well as expanding the crowdedness predictions to more cities, Google is also making them more granular in New York and Sydney. In these cities users will see how crowded individual train carriages are instead of just general crowding on the transit line. The feature works using data provided by transit agencies themselves, and Google says it plans to expand the capability to more cities soon.
Re: (Score:2)
So Only You, Me, and Everyone Else Knows (Score:2)
BFM: OK Google, which subway car is the least full.
Google: Car 3521 is only 20% full.
BFM: [Enter fully packed Car 3521] WTF, Google?
Google: Oh BFM, you have to be faster than that.
Re: (Score:2)
My car.
On the other hand, it isn't like I've ever lived in a place where mass transit was truly a viable option for normal daily life....
Re: (Score:2)
There are places where it is the only viable option. Mostly very large cities.
The crowds don't really bother me, although the lawless behavior kind of does.
Re: (Score:2)
I've seen far more lawless behavior on highways than on subways. The thing that makes transit safe is the very thing that makes it uncomfortable: crowding. There has, in fact, been an uptick in crime on NYC's MTA due to lower ridership, but the rate is still quite low compared to the 1970s.
Re: (Score:2)
Good points. Either way, lawlessness never ends well.
I do remember what the city was like during my first visit in the very early 1990s, and yes, in spite of the huge uptick in violence in the past few years, I'm pretty sure it's still safer now than it was then.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, when the government owns all the roads (Score:2)
They tend to spend a lot of taxpayer money on them. Much of it is taken from taxpayers with cars, through various taxes on driving.
Of course, those same taxpayers also contribute to the funding for government-owned (or sponsored) mass transit.
Re: (Score:2)
And by "much" you mean less than half [uspirg.org], right?
No, certainly not. Car-dependent neighborhoods require subsidies from transit-oriented neighborhoods just to exist [strongtowns.org].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just like how the roads are funded [uspirg.org]!
So let's raise the gas tax to cover 100% of the cost of the roads and watch the higher gas tax reduce traffic, and lower the sales tax accordingly and watch the lower sales tax improve local commerce. Or do you prefer more traffic and less commerce?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Speaking of Texas, TxDot found that no road pays for itself in gases and fees [archive.org], and the gas tax would need to be raised to $2.22 per gallon to cover the cost of the roads. That's about $2 per gallon more than what people in Texas pay today.
Giving every transit rider a car
Re: (Score:2)
Get rid of transport of all of our goods and you can shut the modern economy down too.
And as long as they're there for goods and commerce, why not let individuals drive on them too?
You act like all of us in the US have had a bad quality of life all these decades with our cars, etc.
I dunno about you, but I've quite enjoyed myself so far they way it has been.
Re: (Score:2)
Because without subsidies, roads would not exist?
If you are correct that subsidies are good for the economy, then we should also subsidize other things everyone needs like food, housing, and healthcare, right? Otherwise where does your socialist utopia end?
Re: (Score:2)
Are you saying that the US federal government pays cash payments to companies to keep our roads and cars going....paying private companies budget line items of money to offset what might be losses, etc?
I"ve just never heard of that...?
It's never been a complained about problem till recent years that I've ever heard of and I"m guessing I'm not the only one that hears this and doesn't know WTF this is....?
Re: (Score:2)
By that definition, public transit isn't subsidized. I'm glad we cleared that up, thanks!
Re: (Score:2)
Subsidized, no...I agree.
But public transport is paid for directly by line item city/state budgets with that funding coming directly from citizens' taxes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Me: OK Google, which subway car is the least full.
Google: Car 3521 is only 1% full.
Me: [Enter Car 3521, which indeed only has 1 person] OH DEAR GOD GOOGLE WHY? WHAT IS THAT SMELL? ROTTEN ASSHOLE BAKED IN A BAG OF VOMIT AND URINE?
Google: Never ask for the least full.
Burke Gilman Bicycle Trail In Seattle (Score:4, Interesting)
Can you please tell me when the Burke Gilman Bicycle Trail in Seattle will have the fewest bicycle pace line racers and rollerblade speed skaters so that I can safely walk with my walker on the trail without being hit?
I can see where this would help frail elderly folks like me who are nervous using some of our multi-use-trails.
Re: (Score:2)
Transit App offers multiple mode directions, like transit, ride sharing and bike sharing, but I don't think driving is included.
No. (Score:2)
The feature works using data provided by transit agencies themselves
I don't trust transit data.
In my area, we have two transit agencies. One is a reliable and convenient bus service that has been here for many decades. The other, Sound Transit, is a tax revenue scam. The bus service can get me from my house to the airport with one connection. But some years ago, Sound Transit got their fingers into the county bus scheduling software. And if I look up the times and route info. on line, it attempts to direct me to the Sound Transit buses. Which require more transfers, more c
I might be able to help (Score:1)
Re: I might be able to help (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Is the same true for roads?
Re: (Score:2)
The difference between transit and roads is that roads get much worse when it is crowded, while transit gets better because of more frequent service.
Re: (Score:2)
There is also another difference: transit requires ongoing labor costs to operate, while roads require only intermittent maintenance. In addition, that makes transit susceptible to strikes, as well as equipment failures that are out of control of the user. Equipment failures on roads are on the user, not some political system. At least on transit, you are less susceptible to crashes, but again with roads that is also on the user, not faith in a political system.
Re: (Score:2)
On the other hand, electric trains are immune to the price of oil and the shenanigans of OPEC.
And for the reasons you cited, bicycles are even better: 48 miles per gallon of American orange juice! [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, traffic congestion is a sign of success. As they say, the only thing worse than having congestion is not having congestion! [strongtowns.org]
Would you rather own a restaurant on a desolate road or one that gets congested twice a day?
Re: (Score:2)
The benefits to the restaurant are small compared to the cost of all the time wasted in congestion that could be avoided if people took transit.
Oh, yes, because it's _crowded_. That MUST be it. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Yep, that's a huge factor. At my old job,. there was one co-worker who lived on the other side of tow, took the bus to work. It took him 2 hours each way. By car, the same trip only takes 1/2 hour. Costs are similar.
Nobody takes mass transit anymore, (Score:2)
it's too crowded - Yogi Bear.
Or... (Score:2)
Or, even better, just avoid ALL mass transit and don't contract covid or flu or colds or get mugged or vomited on.