What do you think?
Rate this book
Road to Nowhere: What Silicon Valley Gets Wrong about the Future of Transportation
How to build a transportation system to provide mobility for all
Road to Nowhere exposes the flaws in Silicon Valley’s vision of the future: ride-hailing services such as Uber and Lyft to take us anywhere; electric cars to make them ‘green’; and automation to ensure transport is cheap and ubiquitous. Such promises are implausible and potentially dangerous.
As Paris Marx shows, these technological visions are a threat to our ideas of what a society should be. Electric cars are not a silver bullet for sustainability, and autonomous vehicles won’t guarantee road safety. There will not be underground tunnels to eliminate traffic congestion, and micromobility services will not replace car travel any sooner than we will see the arrival of the long-awaited flying car.
In response, Marx offers a vision for a more collective way of organizing transportation systems that considers the needs of poor, marginalized, and vulnerable people. The book argues that rethinking mobility can be the first step in a broader reimagining of how we design and live in our future cities. We must create streets that allow for social interaction and conviviality. We need reasons to get out of our cars and to use public means of transit determined by community needs rather than algorithmic control. Such decisions should be guided by the search for quality of life rather than for profit.
Road to Nowhere exposes the flaws in Silicon Valley’s vision of the future: ride-hailing services such as Uber and Lyft to take us anywhere; electric cars to make them ‘green’; and automation to ensure transport is cheap and ubiquitous. Such promises are implausible and potentially dangerous.
As Paris Marx shows, these technological visions are a threat to our ideas of what a society should be. Electric cars are not a silver bullet for sustainability, and autonomous vehicles won’t guarantee road safety. There will not be underground tunnels to eliminate traffic congestion, and micromobility services will not replace car travel any sooner than we will see the arrival of the long-awaited flying car.
In response, Marx offers a vision for a more collective way of organizing transportation systems that considers the needs of poor, marginalized, and vulnerable people. The book argues that rethinking mobility can be the first step in a broader reimagining of how we design and live in our future cities. We must create streets that allow for social interaction and conviviality. We need reasons to get out of our cars and to use public means of transit determined by community needs rather than algorithmic control. Such decisions should be guided by the search for quality of life rather than for profit.
240 pages, Paperback
Published July 5, 2022
98 people are currently reading
3040 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 89 reviews
September 18, 2022
Elon Musk would hate this book.
I'm guessing he hasn't read it. If he had, we would probably have heard by now, via Twitter rants directed at its author.
In Road to Nowhere: What Silicon Valley Gets Wrong about the Future of Transportation , Paris Marx pulls no punches. He is blunt and cutting in his treatment of billionaires like Musk, largely demolishing the self-serving narrative tech moguls have built around the future of transport and how we should solve our current transportation woes.
Marx argues that electric cars, subterranean car tunnels, Uber via helicopter - all the 'solutions' for our global transport and climate problems that tech companies have proposed - avoid any real questions around structural change. They accept our current car-centric system, reliant on hundreds of millions of privately owned vehicles, and all the inequities and inefficiencies that go along with it.
Marx takes a deep dive into the history of motorised transport, and the ways that government and business rebuilt the world to suit automobiles. In doing so he reveals some fascinating historical gems. In the early 20th century, when roads were low-speed shared spaces, the introduction of high-speed motorcars led to carnage. Thousands of pedestrians in the US were mowed down by drivers, many of them children, sparking a protest movement calling for cars to have inbuilt speed limiters. Through cunning lobbying the auto industry and its boosters defeated this attempt to limit their products, as they did with so many attempts at regulation over the following decades.
Replicate this win many times, add hundreds of billions in road funding and some greedy car companies colluding to shut down public transport and you find yourself where we are now - living in huge, sprawling cities where many people are utterly and completely chained to car ownership.
Once he has set the stage, Marx turns his cannons on Silicon Valley and the many ways that the tech industry has waded into transportation with fixes that ultimately do more for their bottom line than they do for traffic, pollution or even convenience.
Uber's taxis? They have increased congestion, and lengthened travel times in cities as a result. Musk's Teslas? They are luxury items, accessible mostly to wealthier commuters, and their self-driving capacity is so vastly overstated as to be fraudulent. Boring company tunnels? They are likely to end up being underground toll roads for the rich, while normal people slog through traffic above them.
Fundamentally he argues that the tech industry proposes solutions to things that are primarily problems for well remunerated, able-bodied tech workers, with little thought for the poor, the marginalized or the disabled. They conflate their own personal problems - "why does it take so long for me to get to work in my expensive car?", with the problems facing society, problems which for many people are more likely closer to finding $3 for the bus than sitting in traffic in a $50k+ electric vehicle)
Essentially, Marx argues we need to look at structural solutions, which of course includes that bete noire of billionaires like Musk - effective public transport. Without policies that address the inequities of the system we have, the solutions proposed by companies like Uber and Tesla look like more of the same, with a splash of greenwash and freedom rhetoric on top.
Anyway, it's an interesting read, and well worth your time.
Four breathless Ted Talks on how to Revolutionize Personal Transport (while conveniently making tech moguls fantastically wealthy) out of five.
P.S: This is a great companion piece to Tom Vanderbilt's book Traffic: Why We Drive the Way We Do (and What It Says about Us), a fascinating look into the psychology and culture of driving.
I'm guessing he hasn't read it. If he had, we would probably have heard by now, via Twitter rants directed at its author.
In Road to Nowhere: What Silicon Valley Gets Wrong about the Future of Transportation , Paris Marx pulls no punches. He is blunt and cutting in his treatment of billionaires like Musk, largely demolishing the self-serving narrative tech moguls have built around the future of transport and how we should solve our current transportation woes.
Marx argues that electric cars, subterranean car tunnels, Uber via helicopter - all the 'solutions' for our global transport and climate problems that tech companies have proposed - avoid any real questions around structural change. They accept our current car-centric system, reliant on hundreds of millions of privately owned vehicles, and all the inequities and inefficiencies that go along with it.
Marx takes a deep dive into the history of motorised transport, and the ways that government and business rebuilt the world to suit automobiles. In doing so he reveals some fascinating historical gems. In the early 20th century, when roads were low-speed shared spaces, the introduction of high-speed motorcars led to carnage. Thousands of pedestrians in the US were mowed down by drivers, many of them children, sparking a protest movement calling for cars to have inbuilt speed limiters. Through cunning lobbying the auto industry and its boosters defeated this attempt to limit their products, as they did with so many attempts at regulation over the following decades.
Replicate this win many times, add hundreds of billions in road funding and some greedy car companies colluding to shut down public transport and you find yourself where we are now - living in huge, sprawling cities where many people are utterly and completely chained to car ownership.
Once he has set the stage, Marx turns his cannons on Silicon Valley and the many ways that the tech industry has waded into transportation with fixes that ultimately do more for their bottom line than they do for traffic, pollution or even convenience.
Uber's taxis? They have increased congestion, and lengthened travel times in cities as a result. Musk's Teslas? They are luxury items, accessible mostly to wealthier commuters, and their self-driving capacity is so vastly overstated as to be fraudulent. Boring company tunnels? They are likely to end up being underground toll roads for the rich, while normal people slog through traffic above them.
Fundamentally he argues that the tech industry proposes solutions to things that are primarily problems for well remunerated, able-bodied tech workers, with little thought for the poor, the marginalized or the disabled. They conflate their own personal problems - "why does it take so long for me to get to work in my expensive car?", with the problems facing society, problems which for many people are more likely closer to finding $3 for the bus than sitting in traffic in a $50k+ electric vehicle)
Essentially, Marx argues we need to look at structural solutions, which of course includes that bete noire of billionaires like Musk - effective public transport. Without policies that address the inequities of the system we have, the solutions proposed by companies like Uber and Tesla look like more of the same, with a splash of greenwash and freedom rhetoric on top.
Anyway, it's an interesting read, and well worth your time.
Four breathless Ted Talks on how to Revolutionize Personal Transport (while conveniently making tech moguls fantastically wealthy) out of five.
P.S: This is a great companion piece to Tom Vanderbilt's book Traffic: Why We Drive the Way We Do (and What It Says about Us), a fascinating look into the psychology and culture of driving.
September 28, 2023
Wonderful analysis and smooth writing. Loved this book
July 19, 2024
Policies to reduce car dependence and thus carbon emissions from travel were the topic of my PhD, so I have considerable interest in Wrong Transport Policies and was immediately intrigued by Road to Nowhere: What Silicon Valley Gets Wrong about the Future of Transportation. It is a brief, succinct, and well-argued book, written in an accessible rather than academic style. While a lot of the content was already quite familiar to me, I still learned things and found the synthesis thorough and clearly articulated. Spoilers: capitalism (these days, surveillance capitalism) is the problem.
Marx (any relation?) begins with speedy histories of car adoption in the US, electric vehicles, and the rise of Silicon Valley, before using this context to explain why 21st century tech companies' transport policies are counterproductive nonsense. I always appreciate a nice critique of cars:
During my PhD I remember reading papers on how those who habitually drive frequently state that it is the quickest way to make a journey, not because it actually is (public transport or cycling may be faster) but because they don't consider any other options. Marx also digs up the briefest and neatest summary of Silicon Valley ideology-that-insists-it-isn't-ideology that I've yet read:
This ideology shapes both the Silicon Valley conception of what transport problems are (road congestion, but not access to public transport) and how to solve them (unproven tech like autonomous vehicles and hyperloops, rather than better buses and cycling infrastructure). As Marx argues, the tech industry's views on transport are fundamentally led by a handful of billionaires who don't like getting stuck in freeway traffic. None of whom seem aware that building more roads creates a vicious cycle of worse and worse congestion (including The World's Most Divorced Man, Elon Musk, who claims tunnels will do the trick). This inconvenient paradox has been understood by transport planners, albeit frequently ignored by politicians making infrastructure decisions, for some fifty years. Cars really are a mindblowingly inefficient and wasteful means of moving human beings around. To reduce congestion, you need to slow vehicles down, provide reliable and affordable public transport, use spatial planning to reduce the need for travel, make active travel safe, etc, etc. None of this requires complicated technical 'solutions' from Silicon Valley, rather it necessitates investment in public infrastructure and a well-functioning planning system.
I appreciated the reminder of all this and was fascinated to learn more about why electric vehicles lost out to internal combustion engines (ICEs). Both, and steam propulsion, were used for early cars and vied to become the dominant technology.
Henry Ford really has a lot to answer for (not least the Fordlandia: The Rise and Fall of Henry Ford's Forgotten Jungle City debacle). EVs may be gaining in popularity now, but as Marx points out they do nothing to dislodge the disastrous car-dependence of American and other transport systems. Neither would autonomous vehicles, if they even worked. I did some research into AVs during my time in academia and became deeply sceptical about their potential as general purpose transport. Autonomous trams and buses are a much more realistic prospect, one that Silicon Valley seems indifferent to. Instead, their response to the difficulties of training machine learning systems to drive cars safely is to suggest that pedestrians behave more predictably. Marx also savages the flying car nonsense, Uber's assault on workers rights, and ill-thought-out bike and scooter hire schemes. The common thread is, of course, tech company prioritisation of data collection and grandiose claims intended to inflate stock prices over positive social outcomes. This is hardly unique to transport, as Marx points out:
Road to Nowhere: What Silicon Valley Gets Wrong about the Future of Transportation concludes by discussing the sort of transport futures that Silicon Valley wants and the better options that could be pursued instead. While the book is very much America-centric, it is highly relevant to Europe and beyond. The intersection of surveillance capitalism and transport is an important one that deserves careful analysis. I found much to vehemently agree with in Marx's commentary and was reminded of my own car experiences. I owned and drove a car myself, with great ambivalence, from 2007 and 2009 but have not done so since. One thing I noticed during that period was that I had to go out of my way to get any exercise, so took up jogging. As soon as I moved house so could ditch my car and travel on foot, bike, or public transport again, I no longer had the energy for jogging. It was boring and I much prefer to get exercise while travelling, as nearly everyone did in the days before automobility. In the dense and compact historic cities I've lived in, Cambridge and Edinburgh, active travel is not only practical but also pleasant. Living in a modern low-density suburb where driving in the only option seems like hell to me. Anyway, if you wish to read more on this topic Mobility Justice: The Politics of Movement in an Age of Extremes is excellent for theory and Autogeddon is my favourite anti-car poetry.
Marx (any relation?) begins with speedy histories of car adoption in the US, electric vehicles, and the rise of Silicon Valley, before using this context to explain why 21st century tech companies' transport policies are counterproductive nonsense. I always appreciate a nice critique of cars:
Even as the automobile was promoted as the pinnacle of individual freedom, the reality was that congestion had negated the supposed benefits of mass car ownership. In this way, Gorz called it, 'the paradoxical example of a luxury object that has been devalued by its own spread' - the more cars there were, the less attractive it was to buy one - but 'this practical devaluation has not yet been followed by ideological devaluation'. While the supposed benefits of owning a car were curtailed as commutes kept getting longer due to sprawling suburbs and heavier traffic, people still believed in the individualist benefits it provided.
During my PhD I remember reading papers on how those who habitually drive frequently state that it is the quickest way to make a journey, not because it actually is (public transport or cycling may be faster) but because they don't consider any other options. Marx also digs up the briefest and neatest summary of Silicon Valley ideology-that-insists-it-isn't-ideology that I've yet read:
Critical scholars Richard Barbrook and Andy Cameron dubbed the ideology that grew out of the movement, especially as it found common cause with the neoliberal policies of the 1980s, the 'Californian Ideology'. The way of thinking it embodied 'simultaneously reflects the disciplines of market economic and the freedoms of hippie artisanship. This bizarre hybrid is only made possible through a nearly universal belief in technological determinism'. The counterculture's aversion to politics was central to the Californian Ideology. Its adherents believed social change would happen by engaging the market and trusting in the process of technological development to empower not only the individual, but also the wider world.
This ideology shapes both the Silicon Valley conception of what transport problems are (road congestion, but not access to public transport) and how to solve them (unproven tech like autonomous vehicles and hyperloops, rather than better buses and cycling infrastructure). As Marx argues, the tech industry's views on transport are fundamentally led by a handful of billionaires who don't like getting stuck in freeway traffic. None of whom seem aware that building more roads creates a vicious cycle of worse and worse congestion (including The World's Most Divorced Man, Elon Musk, who claims tunnels will do the trick). This inconvenient paradox has been understood by transport planners, albeit frequently ignored by politicians making infrastructure decisions, for some fifty years. Cars really are a mindblowingly inefficient and wasteful means of moving human beings around. To reduce congestion, you need to slow vehicles down, provide reliable and affordable public transport, use spatial planning to reduce the need for travel, make active travel safe, etc, etc. None of this requires complicated technical 'solutions' from Silicon Valley, rather it necessitates investment in public infrastructure and a well-functioning planning system.
I appreciated the reminder of all this and was fascinated to learn more about why electric vehicles lost out to internal combustion engines (ICEs). Both, and steam propulsion, were used for early cars and vied to become the dominant technology.
The first problem was that the interests that should have backed the electric vehicle failed to do so, or at least not to the degree that was necessary. The electric vehicle was a natural ally for utility companies that were connecting households and promoting new electric products like lights and appliances to increase electricity usage, but they failed to effectively join forces with vehicle makers. [...]
The second problem was to do with production. The EVC [Electric Vehicle Company] never produced a standardised vehicle, and none of the other electric vehicle manufacturers succeeded at streamlining their production processes before Henry Ford introduced the new gas-powered Model T. As a result, customers could buy an internal combustion vehicle at a much lower price than an electric one, and even though the electric vehicle was quieter, offered a smoother drive, and started more easily (the early internal combustion engines had to be hand-cranked), it struggled to compete.
Henry Ford really has a lot to answer for (not least the Fordlandia: The Rise and Fall of Henry Ford's Forgotten Jungle City debacle). EVs may be gaining in popularity now, but as Marx points out they do nothing to dislodge the disastrous car-dependence of American and other transport systems. Neither would autonomous vehicles, if they even worked. I did some research into AVs during my time in academia and became deeply sceptical about their potential as general purpose transport. Autonomous trams and buses are a much more realistic prospect, one that Silicon Valley seems indifferent to. Instead, their response to the difficulties of training machine learning systems to drive cars safely is to suggest that pedestrians behave more predictably. Marx also savages the flying car nonsense, Uber's assault on workers rights, and ill-thought-out bike and scooter hire schemes. The common thread is, of course, tech company prioritisation of data collection and grandiose claims intended to inflate stock prices over positive social outcomes. This is hardly unique to transport, as Marx points out:
In 2015, journalist Lauren Smiley described the growing on-demand, app-based economy as the shut-in economy, where 'you're either pampered, isolated royalty - or you're a 21st century servant'. Smiley observed that San Francisco was increasingly divided into two groups. On one side were the tech workers and a broader group of 'knowledge' workers who earned high salaries, worked long hours, and used the gig apps to get everything from food delivery and laundry services to house cleaning, dog walking, and childcare. On the other was the contract labour force that delivered those services with few protections, no benefits, and precariously low pay. But the apps allowed the served to ignore the conditions of their app-based servants. They could even avoid seeing them altogether. [...]
The shut-in economy is a further example of the desire to keep people at home and work, where they can be delivered everything they need instead of going out to get it themselves, thus keeping the streets clear for autonomous delivery bots, cars, and other forms of mobility.
Road to Nowhere: What Silicon Valley Gets Wrong about the Future of Transportation concludes by discussing the sort of transport futures that Silicon Valley wants and the better options that could be pursued instead. While the book is very much America-centric, it is highly relevant to Europe and beyond. The intersection of surveillance capitalism and transport is an important one that deserves careful analysis. I found much to vehemently agree with in Marx's commentary and was reminded of my own car experiences. I owned and drove a car myself, with great ambivalence, from 2007 and 2009 but have not done so since. One thing I noticed during that period was that I had to go out of my way to get any exercise, so took up jogging. As soon as I moved house so could ditch my car and travel on foot, bike, or public transport again, I no longer had the energy for jogging. It was boring and I much prefer to get exercise while travelling, as nearly everyone did in the days before automobility. In the dense and compact historic cities I've lived in, Cambridge and Edinburgh, active travel is not only practical but also pleasant. Living in a modern low-density suburb where driving in the only option seems like hell to me. Anyway, if you wish to read more on this topic Mobility Justice: The Politics of Movement in an Age of Extremes is excellent for theory and Autogeddon is my favourite anti-car poetry.
August 9, 2022
This book chronicles the history of the American transportation system and its relationship of the American technology industry. In doing so, he tells the story of how deeply rooted political and economic interests shape the status quo and future of transportation, and he suggests that the future of transportation must not include technology or private interests but instead focus on community needs. Marx is a decent storyteller and, as a tech worker in San Francisco, I'm quick to agree that tech executives and workers are a fun and easy target for him to provide commentary on.
I don't necessarily think it's always bad to be pessimistic or hopeless, but I do think that Marx's cynicism throughout the book is unproductive and distracting. That being said, I understand that studying something that feels so bleak is hard, especially when the pragmatic solutions he can provide feel so surface-level.
I do not really regret reading this book, and I enjoyed the historical portions. That being said, despite the somewhat optimistic final chapter, I don't think I would recommend this to someone looking for something actionable.
I don't necessarily think it's always bad to be pessimistic or hopeless, but I do think that Marx's cynicism throughout the book is unproductive and distracting. That being said, I understand that studying something that feels so bleak is hard, especially when the pragmatic solutions he can provide feel so surface-level.
I do not really regret reading this book, and I enjoyed the historical portions. That being said, despite the somewhat optimistic final chapter, I don't think I would recommend this to someone looking for something actionable.
October 20, 2022
it was 5 stars until he said he disagrees with congestion pricing
January 6, 2023
Literally fuck cars, Elon Musk and the Silicon Valley. Thoroughly enjoyed this book and Marx’s biting critique of technological determinism- only criticism is his failure to account for the rigidity of existing road networks and infrastructure outside of the urban context (and the potential for buses to overcome these constraints)…
November 28, 2022
Ok hear me out, what if we just stopped using cars…?
No really, it’s not as crazy as it sounds. In fact, why is it “crazy” to suggest that society stop relying on dirty loud metal cages responsible for millions of deaths, not to mention an impending ecological collapse, each year? Who sold us this idea of an automobile society, and how do they continue to reap transportative hegemony?
These are some of the questions Paris Marx masterfully addresses in this complete critique of the automobile. Any (serious) urban theorist can tell you that the suburban model is flawed. That over the past 100 years Americans have sacrificed sustainability, community, and aesthetics in favor of an automotive regime of drive-ins, car washes, and cul-de-sacs. What many of these theorists constantly stumble on is the “why are things still like this” and “what should we do about it”. For Jane Jacobs the solution was less highways, for the Congress of New Urbanism it’s closer-knit suburbs, and for Silicon Valley it’s electric cars.
Unlike many conventional urban critiques, Marx doesn’t praise these actors for their reforming influence on Autoworld, in fact they straight up ridicule many of them for their failure to tackle the levers of power behind the windshield. Marx fully makes the case that transportation is THE critical issue that will determine the fate of societies (North and South) in the post-COVID world. Throughout the book they identify major junctures where society could have turned away from the automobile and pursued alternative transportative regimes, but ultimately the auto interests have continued to win at every major junction, often rebranding to maintain its promises of independence and quicker travel times. The historical accounting in these sections is quite impressive, with Marx effectively dismantling the notion of an inevitable autoworld and in particular an inevitable fossil fuel autoworld.
However these historical episodes are not purely delightful anecdotes, they are parallels to current trends of Silicon Valley (read as “the post-2008 recession “high” tech industry”) reshaping the automobile regime. In a particularly striking first chapter, Marx highlights the dangers of Elon Musk telling us that driving cars is ok so long as they are electric. In doing so Marx effectively outlines the most thorough shellacking of autoworld that I have ever read. From air pollution to pedestrian deaths to isolated communities to policized sidewalks, the current autoworld is already a hazard for the average person (though perhaps not the average automobile), but taken with Silicon Valley’s “innovations”, and you straight up got an autodystopia.
Grocery drones running the handicapped off the sidewalks, driverless (read as “not actually driverless but actually remote operated by southern workers”) cars running over people, induced demand for electric cars causing(?) Coups for the sake of lithium, random tunnels being built to help the elite evade traffic, Uber eliciting a shadow war against the taxi industry. These are just some of the many disturbing trends ravaging the automobile regime. Perhaps the most insidious aspect of these trends are their packaging. Silicon Valley continues to swoon the government-manufacturer-press automobile alliance by flashing their technological innovations for the sake of furthering the comfort and independence of the people. In reality, this is simply another juncture seeing the shift in power brokers (tho ultimately not the detrimental outcomes) of autoworld.
What keeps this book from being depressing though is Marx’s passionate debunking of the Silicon Valley myths and their final chapter’s detailing of how we may pursue a different transportative regime. Indeed, few of the major urban critique works present an appealing vision for the future that genuinely seems possible (if difficult) to achieve with given conditions. Though Marx nails most of the transportative details of such a world, there is more to be desired regarding how better transportation would reckon with physical infrastructure built so heavily in favor of the automobile (though, if you are interested in a potential vision of this, I recommend Dolores Hayden’s 1980 article “What would a non-sexist city be like”).
Overall though, this is clearly a well-researched book that takes seriously the issue of the automobile, demystifying it’s dominance; image; and support from society. I enjoy reading a lot of older critical geographic works, but this one where I am absolutely glad the author details from 1900 all the way to the present.
Go read this book, please. If we are to stop Silicon Valley’s efforts to take over our (already atrophied) communities (as well as actually move past an Autoworld), we need to change the way we view the automobile, not as a guaranteer of freedom but as an anchor around our necks, separating us from each other and a better tomorrow.
No really, it’s not as crazy as it sounds. In fact, why is it “crazy” to suggest that society stop relying on dirty loud metal cages responsible for millions of deaths, not to mention an impending ecological collapse, each year? Who sold us this idea of an automobile society, and how do they continue to reap transportative hegemony?
These are some of the questions Paris Marx masterfully addresses in this complete critique of the automobile. Any (serious) urban theorist can tell you that the suburban model is flawed. That over the past 100 years Americans have sacrificed sustainability, community, and aesthetics in favor of an automotive regime of drive-ins, car washes, and cul-de-sacs. What many of these theorists constantly stumble on is the “why are things still like this” and “what should we do about it”. For Jane Jacobs the solution was less highways, for the Congress of New Urbanism it’s closer-knit suburbs, and for Silicon Valley it’s electric cars.
Unlike many conventional urban critiques, Marx doesn’t praise these actors for their reforming influence on Autoworld, in fact they straight up ridicule many of them for their failure to tackle the levers of power behind the windshield. Marx fully makes the case that transportation is THE critical issue that will determine the fate of societies (North and South) in the post-COVID world. Throughout the book they identify major junctures where society could have turned away from the automobile and pursued alternative transportative regimes, but ultimately the auto interests have continued to win at every major junction, often rebranding to maintain its promises of independence and quicker travel times. The historical accounting in these sections is quite impressive, with Marx effectively dismantling the notion of an inevitable autoworld and in particular an inevitable fossil fuel autoworld.
However these historical episodes are not purely delightful anecdotes, they are parallels to current trends of Silicon Valley (read as “the post-2008 recession “high” tech industry”) reshaping the automobile regime. In a particularly striking first chapter, Marx highlights the dangers of Elon Musk telling us that driving cars is ok so long as they are electric. In doing so Marx effectively outlines the most thorough shellacking of autoworld that I have ever read. From air pollution to pedestrian deaths to isolated communities to policized sidewalks, the current autoworld is already a hazard for the average person (though perhaps not the average automobile), but taken with Silicon Valley’s “innovations”, and you straight up got an autodystopia.
Grocery drones running the handicapped off the sidewalks, driverless (read as “not actually driverless but actually remote operated by southern workers”) cars running over people, induced demand for electric cars causing(?) Coups for the sake of lithium, random tunnels being built to help the elite evade traffic, Uber eliciting a shadow war against the taxi industry. These are just some of the many disturbing trends ravaging the automobile regime. Perhaps the most insidious aspect of these trends are their packaging. Silicon Valley continues to swoon the government-manufacturer-press automobile alliance by flashing their technological innovations for the sake of furthering the comfort and independence of the people. In reality, this is simply another juncture seeing the shift in power brokers (tho ultimately not the detrimental outcomes) of autoworld.
What keeps this book from being depressing though is Marx’s passionate debunking of the Silicon Valley myths and their final chapter’s detailing of how we may pursue a different transportative regime. Indeed, few of the major urban critique works present an appealing vision for the future that genuinely seems possible (if difficult) to achieve with given conditions. Though Marx nails most of the transportative details of such a world, there is more to be desired regarding how better transportation would reckon with physical infrastructure built so heavily in favor of the automobile (though, if you are interested in a potential vision of this, I recommend Dolores Hayden’s 1980 article “What would a non-sexist city be like”).
Overall though, this is clearly a well-researched book that takes seriously the issue of the automobile, demystifying it’s dominance; image; and support from society. I enjoy reading a lot of older critical geographic works, but this one where I am absolutely glad the author details from 1900 all the way to the present.
Go read this book, please. If we are to stop Silicon Valley’s efforts to take over our (already atrophied) communities (as well as actually move past an Autoworld), we need to change the way we view the automobile, not as a guaranteer of freedom but as an anchor around our necks, separating us from each other and a better tomorrow.
November 19, 2022
A lot of preaching to the converted though, to be fair, there's some things in here I'm not quite converted on. Still, it's easy to read and there's a lot of value in seeing historical and modern instances of capitalism in transportation laid out in one place like this.
January 7, 2024
This book opened my curiosity into learning more about this topic and reflecting how many times I’ve, personally, chosen an easier mobility alternative rather than taking a walk/public transportation/bicycle for paths less than a mile.
The author saves no energy to hit characters such as Elon Musk and companies such as Uber, Tesla and even DoorDash / Lyft. It is interesting to read more about the history for transportation way back in the 20s. This books projects how transportation has been, not only a political matter, but an economic breaking point. Green energies for entrepreneurs such as Musk are not the ultimate goal but rather the instrument for their financial big screen.
It’s a great topic, though the narrative is extremely complex, to many information to digest and somehow repetitive. Pages seemed endless.
The author saves no energy to hit characters such as Elon Musk and companies such as Uber, Tesla and even DoorDash / Lyft. It is interesting to read more about the history for transportation way back in the 20s. This books projects how transportation has been, not only a political matter, but an economic breaking point. Green energies for entrepreneurs such as Musk are not the ultimate goal but rather the instrument for their financial big screen.
It’s a great topic, though the narrative is extremely complex, to many information to digest and somehow repetitive. Pages seemed endless.
November 25, 2023
Fitting that my 60th book this year would also be the book I was perhaps most excited to read.
Paris does a fantastic job of visualizing for the reader how our cities have been controlled and built to serve capital over people. In the 20th century the automobile and now, the tech industry. While being relatively short Paris moves through several Key chapters that outline how Tech and Transportation have changed and affected us over the last 100 years. They cap off with an optimistic chapter that highlights what we can do to improve and cities/nations that are already way ahead of us here in North America.
As a Canadian who is deeply interested in improving transit, cares about the environment, is skeptical and hopes to see the end of capitalism in my lifetime; books like this excite me , but also sadden and anger me. How have we let the automobile and tech control so much of our society and lives? How are people ok with it? If only they knew!
Paris does a fantastic job of visualizing for the reader how our cities have been controlled and built to serve capital over people. In the 20th century the automobile and now, the tech industry. While being relatively short Paris moves through several Key chapters that outline how Tech and Transportation have changed and affected us over the last 100 years. They cap off with an optimistic chapter that highlights what we can do to improve and cities/nations that are already way ahead of us here in North America.
As a Canadian who is deeply interested in improving transit, cares about the environment, is skeptical and hopes to see the end of capitalism in my lifetime; books like this excite me , but also sadden and anger me. How have we let the automobile and tech control so much of our society and lives? How are people ok with it? If only they knew!
November 12, 2024
Cars, and the political ideology they’ve helped to entrench, are one of the greatest blights ever inflicted upon humanity.
September 13, 2022
Good indictment of the car centric, capitalist development of cities from the early 1900s through the 70/80s that is now replicated in the mantras heeded by Silicon Valley VCs and tech conglomerates. Wished he was more thoughtful about the alternative and provided the same level of details to imagining a car free society in the near future.
September 9, 2024
Road to Nowhere is a fabulous book for anyone looking to learn more about automotive dominance in North America.
Marx does a great job discussing the events that led up to the current state of mobility in the United States and Canada. He also expertly connects how Silicon Valley's vision for the future is largely influenced by the systematic precedent for individualized travel. Really a compelling structure that doesn't exactly make me optimistic about the future of travel in North America.
I think Marx is a little weaker when discussing solutions. While this the issue of transportation in America is very abstract and the definition of a "wicked problem," Marx seems to project a little bit when discussing solutions. A lot of it was very good, but I just don't know how pragmatic he's being. Also, his critique of certain Silicon Valley celebrities (Elon) is certainly ad hominem at times.
Maybe I should have guessed this (given his name is literally Marx), but this book is basically anti-capitalist at its core. Marx argues that the desire for profit and the accumulation of capital in privileged spheres of society have both caused the general problem and made it almost impossible to fix. Didn't have a problem with this, but predictably this led the solutions portion of the book to require massive economic and social reform (which he may have been overly optimistic about). His solutions occasionally ranged from out-of-touch to wildly radical, even if they were bolstered by anecdotes from other developed nations. I'd love to read a similar book that doesn't take such a hard line just to see how the final chapters differ.
Overall a very eye-opening read. Will make you angry at big-tech, the financial industry, the automotive industry, the government, basically everything.
Marx does a great job discussing the events that led up to the current state of mobility in the United States and Canada. He also expertly connects how Silicon Valley's vision for the future is largely influenced by the systematic precedent for individualized travel. Really a compelling structure that doesn't exactly make me optimistic about the future of travel in North America.
I think Marx is a little weaker when discussing solutions. While this the issue of transportation in America is very abstract and the definition of a "wicked problem," Marx seems to project a little bit when discussing solutions. A lot of it was very good, but I just don't know how pragmatic he's being. Also, his critique of certain Silicon Valley celebrities (Elon) is certainly ad hominem at times.
Maybe I should have guessed this (given his name is literally Marx), but this book is basically anti-capitalist at its core. Marx argues that the desire for profit and the accumulation of capital in privileged spheres of society have both caused the general problem and made it almost impossible to fix. Didn't have a problem with this, but predictably this led the solutions portion of the book to require massive economic and social reform (which he may have been overly optimistic about). His solutions occasionally ranged from out-of-touch to wildly radical, even if they were bolstered by anecdotes from other developed nations. I'd love to read a similar book that doesn't take such a hard line just to see how the final chapters differ.
Overall a very eye-opening read. Will make you angry at big-tech, the financial industry, the automotive industry, the government, basically everything.
March 15, 2025
Road To Nowhere es un libro editado en 2022 sobre algunos de los dilemas a los que nos enfrentamos, como sociedad y economía, a la conducción autónoma. El libro pasa por los primeros sueños de la conducción autónoma de en las Ferias de Exposición internacionales, hasta pasar por Uber, Tesla, la accidentalidad de las máquinas, los dilemas éticos y el replanteamiento de las ciudades.
Para ser un libro publicado por una editorial universitaria, me ha parecido muy flojo, y que no profundiza en el tema más allá de lo que lo pueden hacer blogs tecnológicos muy populares y que en mi opinión, ya han sembrado una conciencia popular entre la población. No me parece que este libro vaya mucho más allá de ese conocimiento o cultura general.
En este campo, me gustó mucho más Autonomy: The Quest to Build the Driverless Car—And How It Will Reshape Our World, aunque esta obra se centre mucho más en cómo ha sido el desarrollo tecnológico del coche autónomo hasta llegar a nuestros días.
Para ser un libro publicado por una editorial universitaria, me ha parecido muy flojo, y que no profundiza en el tema más allá de lo que lo pueden hacer blogs tecnológicos muy populares y que en mi opinión, ya han sembrado una conciencia popular entre la población. No me parece que este libro vaya mucho más allá de ese conocimiento o cultura general.
En este campo, me gustó mucho más Autonomy: The Quest to Build the Driverless Car—And How It Will Reshape Our World, aunque esta obra se centre mucho más en cómo ha sido el desarrollo tecnológico del coche autónomo hasta llegar a nuestros días.
September 9, 2022
Great book on the transportation infrastructure and big tech's stranglehold on "future visions" through channels of information/vision dissemination. Really illuminating chapters on the ideological foundation of big tech visionaries (focused on automobility, profit and the privatization of public spaces) and the underlying assumptions on the future that inform their visions of the future.
March 7, 2025
silicon valley can't be trusted to build an equitable transportation system, they just want to go fast and break shit and make everything collectively worse, thats basically the book. theres a nice analogy drawn between the automotive industry in the early 20th century and tech companies in the last few decades
December 25, 2022
Well researched and argued book on the real value of what comes out of Silicon Valley in terms of transportation innovation and its impact on normal people. The author develops a strong narrative for more inclusivity in decision making and priority setting.
March 13, 2023
This book taught me a lot about the history of the auto industry and conteztualized a lot of what the tech industry has been moving toward in recent years, especially in regards to Tesla and Elon. It was a joy to read and was incredibly informative.
Read
January 27, 2023at the beginning was having a hard time retaining a lot of the content, but that was a me problem. ended up being a very enjoyable, easy, and informative read. would recommend to anyone.
March 11, 2025
This is one of the best books I’ve read in a while. Highly recommend for anyone interested in transport, cities, tech, capitalism, community, you name it.
August 14, 2022
Decent introduction to the history, present, and future of automobiles in the US. Could've done with a little more detail but if you're new to this area you'll learn a lot.
March 4, 2023
Author Paris Marx’s book is about public transportation in the United states, what is wrong with it, and how to remake it. Modern transportation vehicles and infrastructure are high technological creations. Where there is hi-tech, we see the footprint of Silicon Valley in it. Journalists with a liberal outlook have a natural drift towards documenting all that is wrong with Silicon Valley, its rich elite and their vision for America. This book has its share of criticism of how evil companies like Uber, Amazon and Tesla are and how flawed their vision of public transportation and society is.
The author is a Canadian journalist who writes on technology. The book begins with how inventing the automobile resulted in a concerted effort by vested interests in overhauling our way of life and transportation. Rather than the interests of citizens, the automobile companies’ bottom lines became the focus. Americans got lured to live in far-off suburbs and commute by car every day to work, spending on fuel, vehicle insurance, and maintenance, apart from buying the automobile itself. Would it not have been simpler to live in proximity to our workplaces and the services we use? No one will argue against this except these arguments are as old as the automobile itself.
In the next chapter, ‘Understanding the Silicon Valley worldview’, Marx says Silicon Valley has the self-image of a region created by the entrepreneurism of the smart individual. This individual drops out of college, starts a company in their garage, presents a path-breaking idea and builds a multi-billion dollar empire. Silicon Valley believes that all problems of society have a technological fix or solution. The automobile revolutionized Americans’ lives in the past. Now, the smartphone will do the same for the world. It is an authentic caricature of the Silicon Valley. The author then illustrates how much of Silicon Valley's inventions and innovations benefited from public-funded innovative research that was free to use. Examples are TCP/IP and the internet, touchscreens, gesture control, batteries and displays. Many of Elon Musk’s Space X developments in rocketry got built on top of work done in NASA under public funding. No one would disagree with this either. However, they are well-known facts for decades.
The next three chapters is a critique on electric vehicles, Uber and self-driving vehicles. The author, like most liberals, makes sweeping statements like, “As the current climate crisis escalates and the contradictions of our real transportation system become too great to ignore….”. We have seen the ‘climate crisis’ blamed for even the Syrian civil war, but this was the first time I saw someone blaming it for our transportation network! Given this, it was a surprise to see Marx’s critique of electric cars in the chapter ‘Greenwashing the electric vehicle.’ Her critique mirrors what conservatives have been saying for long. That lithium, cobalt and nickel mines are harmful to the environment and the ills of electric car production get shielded from our sight by moving them to China. Nothing to disagree with or new here.
The critique of Uber and Tesla discusses how Uber exploits its drivers and how their self-driving project killed pedestrians and drivers. The analysis is pessimistic and negative in tone. It has the overtones of ‘the moon landing never happened!’ The author believes that Silicon Valley developed a fresh view of remaking transportation around the world and Uber, Tesla and Amazon’s drone deliveries are all part of that vision. Living in Silicon Valley for the past three decades, I cannot remember any of these companies articulating such a vision upfront. Companies like Uber and Tesla are a product of their times rather than of any desire to redesign the world’s transport. Uber’s ride-hailing model had much to do with the smartphone invention, with a GPS and full software capabilities of a PC in every individual’s hand. Apple released the iPhone in June 2007 and Google the Android phone in 2008. Uber released its ride-hailing app in March 2009. Its popularity with users was so high that it ended up challenging the entrenched taxi businesses.
The author has a dark view of products that have come out of Silicon Valley, including its social-media products like Facebook and Instagram. There are studies which say that Facebook helped many people in combating loneliness. Substantial sections of the public have benefited from services like Uber and Airbnb. Sections of society have been able to ditch the ownership of a car and depend in part on Uber for transport alongside public transit. Many travelers have found Airbnb provides them with various options which didn’t exist before, apart from experiencing a stay in a residential neighbourhood when they are abroad. There are duds as well. The Hyperloop was almost dead on arrival. Only hardcore Elon Musk worshippers believed it might become reality. The same will doubtless be true about full self-driving cars. Some experts in AI believe it would never happen because total safety in self-driving cars needs mastery over Artificial General Intelligence. Computer science and technology are decades away from it, according to them.
The last chapter ‘Towards a better transport future’ offers a collective way of organizing transportation systems that are sensitive to the needs of poor, marginalised, and vulnerable peoples. But we do not need to reinvent mass transportation for metros. Public transport in metropolises like London, Paris, Berlin, Tokyo, Sydney etc, have already shown how to serve the needs of all sections of society. Canada and Australia are countries similar to the United States in geographic spread, even though sparsely populated in comparison. Public transport in Australian cities is as good as any we find in Europe. Sydney’s transport system provides integrated services through buses, trains, ferries, light rail and monorail. Modern electronics and computer technology enable a single ‘Opal card’ to be used across all modes of transport. The more we use the system, the cheaper it gets. Seniors, pensioners, war widows/widowers, asylum seekers etc. of New South Wales pay subsidized, low fares. The services are frequent, clean and safe. It is not patented and so, we can copy them.
The primary impediment to copying it is American culture. The book offers no discussion on how to change American attitudes and outlook developed over two centuries regarding public transit. America’s transportation anomalies did not start in Silicon Valley in 2009. The automobile industry sowed the seeds of the problem more than half-a-century ago. The author offers an impractical call for organized movements of residents, workers, and people who demand an alternative to how things work right now. This needs efforts to generate more democracy within communities. The idea sounds exciting, but there is no critical mass of people who feel that way to make it happen.
Generations of Americans have grown accustomed to using a personal automobile with low gas prices right after they walk out the front door of their house. The image of driving the long, open road with just oneself in the car is a fancy that has a big hold on Americans. It creates visions of the lone cowboy on his horse in the wilderness of a pristine America centuries ago. American culture believes in the private enterprise providing solutions. It views public transit as welfare and does not accept public money spent on local and intercity buses with sparse utilization. Then, there is the NIMBY culture, notably in California. The San Jose - San Francisco high-speed rail is stillborn, thirty years after the proposal. Everyone would like it if the rail tracks were far from where they live. These are some reasons nice, workable European solutions do not translate here.
The book is less about transportation and more about changing America’s economic and political structure. It is about making capitalism more humane and focused on the public good instead of profit. European socialists struggled with this problem a century ago and concluded that capitalist social democracy to be the partial answer. But American voters have concluded they are against such a system. So, how do we proceed, short of a revolution? But revolutions create their own problems. Didn’t Albert Camus write that revolutions put an end to a current tyranny, but never stop a new tyranny from rising?
The book leaves us with more questions than answers.
The author is a Canadian journalist who writes on technology. The book begins with how inventing the automobile resulted in a concerted effort by vested interests in overhauling our way of life and transportation. Rather than the interests of citizens, the automobile companies’ bottom lines became the focus. Americans got lured to live in far-off suburbs and commute by car every day to work, spending on fuel, vehicle insurance, and maintenance, apart from buying the automobile itself. Would it not have been simpler to live in proximity to our workplaces and the services we use? No one will argue against this except these arguments are as old as the automobile itself.
In the next chapter, ‘Understanding the Silicon Valley worldview’, Marx says Silicon Valley has the self-image of a region created by the entrepreneurism of the smart individual. This individual drops out of college, starts a company in their garage, presents a path-breaking idea and builds a multi-billion dollar empire. Silicon Valley believes that all problems of society have a technological fix or solution. The automobile revolutionized Americans’ lives in the past. Now, the smartphone will do the same for the world. It is an authentic caricature of the Silicon Valley. The author then illustrates how much of Silicon Valley's inventions and innovations benefited from public-funded innovative research that was free to use. Examples are TCP/IP and the internet, touchscreens, gesture control, batteries and displays. Many of Elon Musk’s Space X developments in rocketry got built on top of work done in NASA under public funding. No one would disagree with this either. However, they are well-known facts for decades.
The next three chapters is a critique on electric vehicles, Uber and self-driving vehicles. The author, like most liberals, makes sweeping statements like, “As the current climate crisis escalates and the contradictions of our real transportation system become too great to ignore….”. We have seen the ‘climate crisis’ blamed for even the Syrian civil war, but this was the first time I saw someone blaming it for our transportation network! Given this, it was a surprise to see Marx’s critique of electric cars in the chapter ‘Greenwashing the electric vehicle.’ Her critique mirrors what conservatives have been saying for long. That lithium, cobalt and nickel mines are harmful to the environment and the ills of electric car production get shielded from our sight by moving them to China. Nothing to disagree with or new here.
The critique of Uber and Tesla discusses how Uber exploits its drivers and how their self-driving project killed pedestrians and drivers. The analysis is pessimistic and negative in tone. It has the overtones of ‘the moon landing never happened!’ The author believes that Silicon Valley developed a fresh view of remaking transportation around the world and Uber, Tesla and Amazon’s drone deliveries are all part of that vision. Living in Silicon Valley for the past three decades, I cannot remember any of these companies articulating such a vision upfront. Companies like Uber and Tesla are a product of their times rather than of any desire to redesign the world’s transport. Uber’s ride-hailing model had much to do with the smartphone invention, with a GPS and full software capabilities of a PC in every individual’s hand. Apple released the iPhone in June 2007 and Google the Android phone in 2008. Uber released its ride-hailing app in March 2009. Its popularity with users was so high that it ended up challenging the entrenched taxi businesses.
The author has a dark view of products that have come out of Silicon Valley, including its social-media products like Facebook and Instagram. There are studies which say that Facebook helped many people in combating loneliness. Substantial sections of the public have benefited from services like Uber and Airbnb. Sections of society have been able to ditch the ownership of a car and depend in part on Uber for transport alongside public transit. Many travelers have found Airbnb provides them with various options which didn’t exist before, apart from experiencing a stay in a residential neighbourhood when they are abroad. There are duds as well. The Hyperloop was almost dead on arrival. Only hardcore Elon Musk worshippers believed it might become reality. The same will doubtless be true about full self-driving cars. Some experts in AI believe it would never happen because total safety in self-driving cars needs mastery over Artificial General Intelligence. Computer science and technology are decades away from it, according to them.
The last chapter ‘Towards a better transport future’ offers a collective way of organizing transportation systems that are sensitive to the needs of poor, marginalised, and vulnerable peoples. But we do not need to reinvent mass transportation for metros. Public transport in metropolises like London, Paris, Berlin, Tokyo, Sydney etc, have already shown how to serve the needs of all sections of society. Canada and Australia are countries similar to the United States in geographic spread, even though sparsely populated in comparison. Public transport in Australian cities is as good as any we find in Europe. Sydney’s transport system provides integrated services through buses, trains, ferries, light rail and monorail. Modern electronics and computer technology enable a single ‘Opal card’ to be used across all modes of transport. The more we use the system, the cheaper it gets. Seniors, pensioners, war widows/widowers, asylum seekers etc. of New South Wales pay subsidized, low fares. The services are frequent, clean and safe. It is not patented and so, we can copy them.
The primary impediment to copying it is American culture. The book offers no discussion on how to change American attitudes and outlook developed over two centuries regarding public transit. America’s transportation anomalies did not start in Silicon Valley in 2009. The automobile industry sowed the seeds of the problem more than half-a-century ago. The author offers an impractical call for organized movements of residents, workers, and people who demand an alternative to how things work right now. This needs efforts to generate more democracy within communities. The idea sounds exciting, but there is no critical mass of people who feel that way to make it happen.
Generations of Americans have grown accustomed to using a personal automobile with low gas prices right after they walk out the front door of their house. The image of driving the long, open road with just oneself in the car is a fancy that has a big hold on Americans. It creates visions of the lone cowboy on his horse in the wilderness of a pristine America centuries ago. American culture believes in the private enterprise providing solutions. It views public transit as welfare and does not accept public money spent on local and intercity buses with sparse utilization. Then, there is the NIMBY culture, notably in California. The San Jose - San Francisco high-speed rail is stillborn, thirty years after the proposal. Everyone would like it if the rail tracks were far from where they live. These are some reasons nice, workable European solutions do not translate here.
The book is less about transportation and more about changing America’s economic and political structure. It is about making capitalism more humane and focused on the public good instead of profit. European socialists struggled with this problem a century ago and concluded that capitalist social democracy to be the partial answer. But American voters have concluded they are against such a system. So, how do we proceed, short of a revolution? But revolutions create their own problems. Didn’t Albert Camus write that revolutions put an end to a current tyranny, but never stop a new tyranny from rising?
The book leaves us with more questions than answers.
April 14, 2025
Based bikepilled book.
— My thoughts —
Paris drops some bangers and leans socialist, which makes more a compelling case against car-centric infrastructure that occasionally veers into tenuous territory.
Overall, this book boils down to one point: technology is not and can not be apolitical. It exists within a social context, and it often entrenches power imbalances present in that context.
This point is completely valid, and it’s important to carefully consider whether adopting new technologies is actually a good idea. It's worth asking a few questions:
- Can they deliver the tech they're promising?
- If it's delivered, to whom is it accessible?
- At scale, will it have the effect that they promise?
- What incentives does the tech create?
— Rough summary & notable quotes —
Chapter 1. How the Automobile Disrupted Mobility
“[a car is like] a seaside villa, which ‘is only desirable and useful insofar as the masses do not have one.’”
When cars first became prevalent, the deaths they caused were abhorrent to the general population. In 1919, the city of Detroit had bells all around town ring eight times on every day someone was killed by a car. 100 years later, an Australian study found that 55 percent of non-cyclists perceived cyclists as “less than human.”
Meanwhile, the general public bears the cost of car infrastructure. While gas taxes fund the construction of roads, only 11% of road maintenance funding comes from these sources. The other 89% comes from general taxes.
In short, cars were a technology that the general public didn’t ask for and benefited the rich at the expense of the rest. This sets the scene for Silicon Valley’s role in transportation planning.
Chapter 2. Understanding the Silicon Valley worldview
“The internet was largely not the product of private enterprise but of military and other public research bodies.”
In spite of this fact, Silicon Valley culture grew around the idea of disrupting stagnant industries. The tech industry is now often seen as the paragon of unregulated industry, despite only being made possible by enormous government investment.
Chapter 3. Greenwashing the electric vehicle
This chapter can be summarized with two quotes, both bangers:
1. “A more equitable, environmentally conscious transportation system will ultimately require reducing the use of automobiles, regardless of what powers them, and embracing other forms of mobility that not only produce fewer emission per person but offer a path to reimagining our communities in a way that does not need to make room for cars.”
2. “While converting internal combustion vehicles to electric vehicles would reduce the total carbon footprint of the transport system, it would not be sufficient to address transportation’s contribution to climate change, nor would it do enough to lessen the other serious social and health problems that result from automobiles and the communities they have created.”
Chapter 4. Uber’s Assault on Cities and Labor
Hey, it turns out removing the limit on the number of taxis in a city is a bad thing: “ride-hailing vehicles ‘are the biggest factor driving the rapid growth of congestion and deterioration of travel time reliability in San Francisco,’” says one study.
Hey, it turns out that Uber wasn’t totally honest about how much their drivers make: “Uber settled charges by the Federal Trade Commission after the agency found its claims about high earnings in New York City, San Francisco, and other major cities were false—but by that time the damage had been done.”
Hey, why aren’t gig workers legally considered employees when they’re functionally employees? “Uber and Lyft had joined forces with other companies in the gig economy like DoorDash and Instacart to prepare a ballot measure to be considered by California voters that would cement their workers’ status as independent contractors. (…) The companies put more than $200 million behind the campaign.” Oh, that’s why.
Chapter 5. Self-Driving Cars Did Not Deliver
This chapter looks a little foolish in the context of Waymo being generally available in a few cities around the world. They can’t all be hits. Here’s a great quote from this chapter though:
“We must be able to imagine better ways of organizing mobility; but in the process, we also need to consider the regulatory systems those visions will require and how existing measures will need to be altered to make way for them.”
Chapter 6. Making New Roads for Cars
TL;DR - Elon’s an idiot who built a shitty tunnel for shittier cars. More at 11.
Chapter 7. The Coming Fight for the Sidewalk
TL;DR - profit-seeking businesses will take advantage of every common good, including the sidewalk. Spin scooters deserve to be Sparta kicked into the street.
“Their ideas of the future are not the only path forward, and they often benefit people like themselves at the expense of low-income and marginalized residents.”
“The technologies unleashed by Silicon Valley are not neutral. They contain within them the worldviews of the people who develop them;”
Chapter 8. The Real Futures That Tech is Building
Here are three plausible futures that tech will build, according to Marx:
1. The Gated Greenwashed City - every home is powered by solar panels, but your broke ass can’t afford one.
2. The City Without Pedestrians - why spend 15 minutes walking to the grocery store when you could spend 30 minutes stuck in traffic?
3. The City of Algorithmic Control - the city is chock full of smart businesses leveraging the most powerful AI technology that turns out to be workers in India getting paid peanuts. It isn’t all bad, though. Ever tried calling Walgreens and end up getting stuck in an endless cycle of automated voice messaging systems? In the future, that can be your whole world.
“The decisions of venture capitalists to fund companies that are transforming the way we move, consume, and conduct our daily lives should not be perceived as neutral actions. Rather, they are pushing particular visions of the future that benefit themselves by funding the years-long efforts of companies to monopolize their sectors and lobby to alter regulatory structures in their favor.”
Chapter 9. Toward a Better Transport Future
TL;DR - if the problem with Silicon Valley’s transportation philosophy is that it ignores the wants of the masses, the solution is to democratize the process of shaping our transportation system.
“technology is how a society copes with physical reality: how people get and keep and cook food, how they clothe themselves, what their power sources are (animal? human? water? wind? electricity? other?) what they build with and what they build, their medicine—and so on and on. Perhaps very ethereal people aren’t interested in these mundane, bodily matters, but I’m fascinated by them, and I think most of my readers are too.” - Ursula K Le Guin
“Building better cities requires taking housing, transport, and other essential services out of the market altogether, and running them as public services with democratic accountability.”
A common thread in this book and in Why Nations Fail is that accountability is a necessary component of a system that is supposed to serve the people. When a government can set the price of crops without input from the farmers, when a tech company can squeeze out all competition and take advantage of its users thanks to its monopoly power, then the system will fail its people.
This leads to our final quote: “Better futures are possible, but they will not be delivered through technological advancement alone. They require engaging with the problems of our time and recognizing that they do not exist simply because we do not have the requisite technology to solve them. (…) It requires a new politics that recognizes economic growth and technological innovation do not guarantee social progress.”
— My thoughts —
Paris drops some bangers and leans socialist, which makes more a compelling case against car-centric infrastructure that occasionally veers into tenuous territory.
Overall, this book boils down to one point: technology is not and can not be apolitical. It exists within a social context, and it often entrenches power imbalances present in that context.
This point is completely valid, and it’s important to carefully consider whether adopting new technologies is actually a good idea. It's worth asking a few questions:
- Can they deliver the tech they're promising?
- If it's delivered, to whom is it accessible?
- At scale, will it have the effect that they promise?
- What incentives does the tech create?
— Rough summary & notable quotes —
Chapter 1. How the Automobile Disrupted Mobility
“[a car is like] a seaside villa, which ‘is only desirable and useful insofar as the masses do not have one.’”
When cars first became prevalent, the deaths they caused were abhorrent to the general population. In 1919, the city of Detroit had bells all around town ring eight times on every day someone was killed by a car. 100 years later, an Australian study found that 55 percent of non-cyclists perceived cyclists as “less than human.”
Meanwhile, the general public bears the cost of car infrastructure. While gas taxes fund the construction of roads, only 11% of road maintenance funding comes from these sources. The other 89% comes from general taxes.
In short, cars were a technology that the general public didn’t ask for and benefited the rich at the expense of the rest. This sets the scene for Silicon Valley’s role in transportation planning.
Chapter 2. Understanding the Silicon Valley worldview
“The internet was largely not the product of private enterprise but of military and other public research bodies.”
In spite of this fact, Silicon Valley culture grew around the idea of disrupting stagnant industries. The tech industry is now often seen as the paragon of unregulated industry, despite only being made possible by enormous government investment.
Chapter 3. Greenwashing the electric vehicle
This chapter can be summarized with two quotes, both bangers:
1. “A more equitable, environmentally conscious transportation system will ultimately require reducing the use of automobiles, regardless of what powers them, and embracing other forms of mobility that not only produce fewer emission per person but offer a path to reimagining our communities in a way that does not need to make room for cars.”
2. “While converting internal combustion vehicles to electric vehicles would reduce the total carbon footprint of the transport system, it would not be sufficient to address transportation’s contribution to climate change, nor would it do enough to lessen the other serious social and health problems that result from automobiles and the communities they have created.”
Chapter 4. Uber’s Assault on Cities and Labor
Hey, it turns out removing the limit on the number of taxis in a city is a bad thing: “ride-hailing vehicles ‘are the biggest factor driving the rapid growth of congestion and deterioration of travel time reliability in San Francisco,’” says one study.
Hey, it turns out that Uber wasn’t totally honest about how much their drivers make: “Uber settled charges by the Federal Trade Commission after the agency found its claims about high earnings in New York City, San Francisco, and other major cities were false—but by that time the damage had been done.”
Hey, why aren’t gig workers legally considered employees when they’re functionally employees? “Uber and Lyft had joined forces with other companies in the gig economy like DoorDash and Instacart to prepare a ballot measure to be considered by California voters that would cement their workers’ status as independent contractors. (…) The companies put more than $200 million behind the campaign.” Oh, that’s why.
Chapter 5. Self-Driving Cars Did Not Deliver
This chapter looks a little foolish in the context of Waymo being generally available in a few cities around the world. They can’t all be hits. Here’s a great quote from this chapter though:
“We must be able to imagine better ways of organizing mobility; but in the process, we also need to consider the regulatory systems those visions will require and how existing measures will need to be altered to make way for them.”
Chapter 6. Making New Roads for Cars
TL;DR - Elon’s an idiot who built a shitty tunnel for shittier cars. More at 11.
Chapter 7. The Coming Fight for the Sidewalk
TL;DR - profit-seeking businesses will take advantage of every common good, including the sidewalk. Spin scooters deserve to be Sparta kicked into the street.
“Their ideas of the future are not the only path forward, and they often benefit people like themselves at the expense of low-income and marginalized residents.”
“The technologies unleashed by Silicon Valley are not neutral. They contain within them the worldviews of the people who develop them;”
Chapter 8. The Real Futures That Tech is Building
Here are three plausible futures that tech will build, according to Marx:
1. The Gated Greenwashed City - every home is powered by solar panels, but your broke ass can’t afford one.
2. The City Without Pedestrians - why spend 15 minutes walking to the grocery store when you could spend 30 minutes stuck in traffic?
3. The City of Algorithmic Control - the city is chock full of smart businesses leveraging the most powerful AI technology that turns out to be workers in India getting paid peanuts. It isn’t all bad, though. Ever tried calling Walgreens and end up getting stuck in an endless cycle of automated voice messaging systems? In the future, that can be your whole world.
“The decisions of venture capitalists to fund companies that are transforming the way we move, consume, and conduct our daily lives should not be perceived as neutral actions. Rather, they are pushing particular visions of the future that benefit themselves by funding the years-long efforts of companies to monopolize their sectors and lobby to alter regulatory structures in their favor.”
Chapter 9. Toward a Better Transport Future
TL;DR - if the problem with Silicon Valley’s transportation philosophy is that it ignores the wants of the masses, the solution is to democratize the process of shaping our transportation system.
“technology is how a society copes with physical reality: how people get and keep and cook food, how they clothe themselves, what their power sources are (animal? human? water? wind? electricity? other?) what they build with and what they build, their medicine—and so on and on. Perhaps very ethereal people aren’t interested in these mundane, bodily matters, but I’m fascinated by them, and I think most of my readers are too.” - Ursula K Le Guin
“Building better cities requires taking housing, transport, and other essential services out of the market altogether, and running them as public services with democratic accountability.”
A common thread in this book and in Why Nations Fail is that accountability is a necessary component of a system that is supposed to serve the people. When a government can set the price of crops without input from the farmers, when a tech company can squeeze out all competition and take advantage of its users thanks to its monopoly power, then the system will fail its people.
This leads to our final quote: “Better futures are possible, but they will not be delivered through technological advancement alone. They require engaging with the problems of our time and recognizing that they do not exist simply because we do not have the requisite technology to solve them. (…) It requires a new politics that recognizes economic growth and technological innovation do not guarantee social progress.”
August 1, 2025
A solid overview of the narrow-minded, privileged thinking that underlies Silicon Valley transportation solutions: dockless scooters and bikes, Uber, underground tunnels and flying vehicles, and electric vehicles. Some of these companies were at their peak when I was still young, so I wasn't as well-versed in their history and negative impact.
This book helped tie together different concepts in my head and gave me more reasons to believe that we can't simply substitute all ICE vehicles for electric vehicles (I explored this subject in previous writing **here**).
- "Electric vehicles may not have tailpipe emissions, but that is not the sole source of the local air pollution that produces smog and causes a range of health problems, including more than 53,000 annual premature deaths in the United States alone. 22 The particulate matter that causes that air pollution also comes from wear to tires, brake pads, and resuspending dust on the roadways. Those particles are incredibly small, and while electric vehicles tend to produce less of the 10 micrometer particles, known as PM10, the heavier electric vehicles that are increasingly being marketed in North America usually produce more of the smaller 2.5 micrometer or PM2.5 variety, which are more harmful to human health."
- "The researchers explained that wealthy people do not always buy electric vehicles for the environmental benefits. The electric vehicle will not be their only vehicle and is unlikely to be their primary vehicle. That means the environmental benefit is lessened, as it is not fully replacing all the driving that would have been done with their conventional car or SUV."
- "As it shifts production to China with its planned Shanghai Gigafactory, the company’s emissions have been rising. But that increase is not simply because it is expanding and producing more vehicles; the production emissions of each individual vehicle are also rising, which means they will need to last even longer to ensure their lifecycle emissions—the total amount they emit from manufacture to when they are retired—are lower than a conventional vehicle.21 Tesla’s Nevada factory was supposed to derive power from solar panels covering its roof, but the company never finished building the solar array. Further, Tesla vehicles already have a reputation for poor build quality with customers consistently complaining of problems with their vehicles and reports detailing the high quantity of wasted parts in the production process. As the vehicles age, Tesla has been recalling hundreds of thousands of them for everything from drivetrain issues to touchscreen failures. Bear in mind that the company only produced its millionth car in 2020. Tesla even told regulators that its touchscreens were only intended to last for five to six years, far less than the average lifespan of a vehicle. The company may have a great brand image, but its vehicles are not built to last, which should further call into question their “green” reputation."
I appreciated the history behind the automotive industry and oil industry coming together in the 1910s/1920s to remake city roads for cars, despite community outrage due to staggering pedestrian deaths. This book also taught me how we lost our streetcar infrastructure.
- "In 1920, the population of the United States was a little over 106 million, but the death toll from automobiles was staggering and on the rise. In the four years following Armistice Day in 1918, it was widely publicized that “more Americans were killed in automobile accidents than had died in battle in France,” and through the 1920s more than 200,000 lives were lost to cars."
- "The automobile provided few benefits to the average city dweller, yet their children and family members were being killed in the street, their access was being revoked, and the benefits of this dangerous new technology were almost exclusively captured by the wealthiest residents—both in the sense of their personal ownership of automobiles, and in how they were often reaping profits from associated industries."
- "Whereas growing sums of money were being invested into road infrastructure made freely available to automobiles, streetcars were treated as businesses, not as public services, and the rare attempts to get voters to approve new transit funding did not receive enough support. Not only did streetcar companies begin to fail, but automotive interests helped to accelerate their decline. General Motors, Standard Oil of California, and Firestone Tire Company formed a bus company called National City Lines in the 1930s to buy up streetcar networks around the country, dismantle them, and replace them with buses."
The final chapter presents some approaches to achieve equitable urban transformation, but they felt too simplistic. Marx is against congestion pricing (“On the city level, the marketization and commodification of transportation needs to be halted, including the implementation of congestion pricing mechanisms.") but I couldn't find an explanation or a citation to explain why. Marx also generically calls for democratic decision making in communities, but I've seen in case studies from other books, like Streetfight, how there needs to be balance between action and community input. Waiting too long to gather community input or trying to address every piece of feedback can delay projects for too long. There also are more effective and less effective ways to get feedback from the community.
This book helped tie together different concepts in my head and gave me more reasons to believe that we can't simply substitute all ICE vehicles for electric vehicles (I explored this subject in previous writing **here**).
- "Electric vehicles may not have tailpipe emissions, but that is not the sole source of the local air pollution that produces smog and causes a range of health problems, including more than 53,000 annual premature deaths in the United States alone. 22 The particulate matter that causes that air pollution also comes from wear to tires, brake pads, and resuspending dust on the roadways. Those particles are incredibly small, and while electric vehicles tend to produce less of the 10 micrometer particles, known as PM10, the heavier electric vehicles that are increasingly being marketed in North America usually produce more of the smaller 2.5 micrometer or PM2.5 variety, which are more harmful to human health."
- "The researchers explained that wealthy people do not always buy electric vehicles for the environmental benefits. The electric vehicle will not be their only vehicle and is unlikely to be their primary vehicle. That means the environmental benefit is lessened, as it is not fully replacing all the driving that would have been done with their conventional car or SUV."
- "As it shifts production to China with its planned Shanghai Gigafactory, the company’s emissions have been rising. But that increase is not simply because it is expanding and producing more vehicles; the production emissions of each individual vehicle are also rising, which means they will need to last even longer to ensure their lifecycle emissions—the total amount they emit from manufacture to when they are retired—are lower than a conventional vehicle.21 Tesla’s Nevada factory was supposed to derive power from solar panels covering its roof, but the company never finished building the solar array. Further, Tesla vehicles already have a reputation for poor build quality with customers consistently complaining of problems with their vehicles and reports detailing the high quantity of wasted parts in the production process. As the vehicles age, Tesla has been recalling hundreds of thousands of them for everything from drivetrain issues to touchscreen failures. Bear in mind that the company only produced its millionth car in 2020. Tesla even told regulators that its touchscreens were only intended to last for five to six years, far less than the average lifespan of a vehicle. The company may have a great brand image, but its vehicles are not built to last, which should further call into question their “green” reputation."
I appreciated the history behind the automotive industry and oil industry coming together in the 1910s/1920s to remake city roads for cars, despite community outrage due to staggering pedestrian deaths. This book also taught me how we lost our streetcar infrastructure.
- "In 1920, the population of the United States was a little over 106 million, but the death toll from automobiles was staggering and on the rise. In the four years following Armistice Day in 1918, it was widely publicized that “more Americans were killed in automobile accidents than had died in battle in France,” and through the 1920s more than 200,000 lives were lost to cars."
- "The automobile provided few benefits to the average city dweller, yet their children and family members were being killed in the street, their access was being revoked, and the benefits of this dangerous new technology were almost exclusively captured by the wealthiest residents—both in the sense of their personal ownership of automobiles, and in how they were often reaping profits from associated industries."
- "Whereas growing sums of money were being invested into road infrastructure made freely available to automobiles, streetcars were treated as businesses, not as public services, and the rare attempts to get voters to approve new transit funding did not receive enough support. Not only did streetcar companies begin to fail, but automotive interests helped to accelerate their decline. General Motors, Standard Oil of California, and Firestone Tire Company formed a bus company called National City Lines in the 1930s to buy up streetcar networks around the country, dismantle them, and replace them with buses."
The final chapter presents some approaches to achieve equitable urban transformation, but they felt too simplistic. Marx is against congestion pricing (“On the city level, the marketization and commodification of transportation needs to be halted, including the implementation of congestion pricing mechanisms.") but I couldn't find an explanation or a citation to explain why. Marx also generically calls for democratic decision making in communities, but I've seen in case studies from other books, like Streetfight, how there needs to be balance between action and community input. Waiting too long to gather community input or trying to address every piece of feedback can delay projects for too long. There also are more effective and less effective ways to get feedback from the community.
July 23, 2022
Paris Marx. Hilarious nom de plume. And the ambition of this volume is fascinating, as it is brazen. So Uber works, Tesla exists and all of them move people from A to B in ways that the people seem to like. Marx is here to bambooze you into knowing there was no Holocaust, and Jews only have inflated the numbers. In the end, Marx wants to tell you that you have no need to move around, you should stay put where the majestic controllers need your raw muscle power for the good of the multitudes.
March 2, 2025
Paris Marx has become one of my favorite critics of the Silicon Valley tech bubble. This book is a fantastic dive into all the new problems that emerge from our reliance on technology to solve problems, and the necessity for capitalism to be able to conjure new (marketable!) technological fixes for problems that have already been solved. We don’t need Tesla to fix traffic, we just need some well maintained public transit and safe places to bike/walk.
January 30, 2024
While I really like Paris Marx's podcast, I found this book a bit drier then I expected. The topic of the book is very important and Paris clearly did extensive research, but I found myself almost falling asleep during the middle chapters. I still would recommend this book to anything interested, but be prepared to push through the rough patches.
July 15, 2023
Este libro es un ensayo sobre la visión de las llamadas empresas "tecnológicas" de Silicon Valley sobre la movilidad urbana en términos generales. En el texto, Paris Marx busca mostrar el componente ideológico detrás de esta visión. En la cual, aunque las empresas proponen un futuro social mejor, busca objetivos particulares y privados, en los cuales se establecen monopolios sobre el transporte y se apropian de bienes comunes para su beneficio. Una visión generada por las elites de estas empresas, que no buscan atender las desigualdades inherentes a los sistemas de transporte ni de las ciudades.
El libro esta dividido en nueve capítulos. El primero es un recuento histórico de como el surgimiento del automóvil, como tecnología, genero un discurso detrás de él, así como intereses económicos que se acomodaron para transformar las ciudades en beneficio del a industria automotriz. Esto basándose en el caso de EUA. A partir de este ejemplo, comienza en los siguientes capítulos a desenmarañar el discurso de las empresas tecnológicas. En el segundo capítulo habla sobre la visión general del mundo que tienen las empresas del Silicon Valley y su fe en la tecnología y las políticas neoliberales.
En los capítulos siguientes muestra varios ejemplos de las soluciones tecnológicas propuestas y sus efectos negativos sociales. En el tercer capítulo habla sobre la falsa solución ambiental del auto eléctrico dado los requerimientos energéticos y de minería extractivista que requieren. En el cuarto capítulo, habla sobre como Uber entró a diversas ciudades del mundo violando leyes, recomponiendolas, pero fundamentalmente alterando el mercado laboral, que ha resultado en una mayor disciplina hacia los conductores de taxi. En el quinto capítulo trata sobre el fracaso de los autos autónomos, a pesar de todas las promesas que se han hecho a su alrededor. En el sexto capítulo, critica la visión de Elon Musk de los túneles exclusivos para autos, que solo replican una visión de segregación poblacional y autocentrista de la sociedad. En el capítulo siete, habla de como las empresas tecnológicas ahora tratan de apropiarse del recurso común de las banquetas, mediante las soluciones de "micromovilidad" o los vehículos autónomos de carga de última milla, entre otros servicios.
El octavo capítulo, habla sobre los futuros que las visiones tecnológicas de Silicon Valley crearían, es decir, generarían mayor segregación socioeconómica, acceso limitado a los recursos comunes y un transporte menos democrático.
El capitulo final, habla de ejemplos alrededor del mundo que van en contratendencia y pueden servir de guía para enfrentar estos futuros. Aunque deja en claro,que debe de venir acompañado de una mayor planeación, en especial de vivienda, porque se mezcla con fenómenos de gentrificación que generan mayor desigualdad social.
En las conclusiones finalmente llama a tomar acción por políticas de transporte pensadas en el bien común y de carácter democrático que lleven a mejores ciudades. El autor aclara que no es una visión anti-tecnología, sino del cómo se utiliza la tecnología y cuales son sus objetivos. Probablemente la parte menos desarrollada del libro es su posición política final, pues si bien es altamente critico a lo que la dinámica capitalista de estas empresas impulsa, pareciera que su posición es de carácter reformista.
Un libro altamente recomendado para interesados en temas de ciudad, de planeación urbana y de movilidad urbana, así como de tecnología y desigualdades. Uno que es totalmente relevante para el momento actual.
El libro esta dividido en nueve capítulos. El primero es un recuento histórico de como el surgimiento del automóvil, como tecnología, genero un discurso detrás de él, así como intereses económicos que se acomodaron para transformar las ciudades en beneficio del a industria automotriz. Esto basándose en el caso de EUA. A partir de este ejemplo, comienza en los siguientes capítulos a desenmarañar el discurso de las empresas tecnológicas. En el segundo capítulo habla sobre la visión general del mundo que tienen las empresas del Silicon Valley y su fe en la tecnología y las políticas neoliberales.
En los capítulos siguientes muestra varios ejemplos de las soluciones tecnológicas propuestas y sus efectos negativos sociales. En el tercer capítulo habla sobre la falsa solución ambiental del auto eléctrico dado los requerimientos energéticos y de minería extractivista que requieren. En el cuarto capítulo, habla sobre como Uber entró a diversas ciudades del mundo violando leyes, recomponiendolas, pero fundamentalmente alterando el mercado laboral, que ha resultado en una mayor disciplina hacia los conductores de taxi. En el quinto capítulo trata sobre el fracaso de los autos autónomos, a pesar de todas las promesas que se han hecho a su alrededor. En el sexto capítulo, critica la visión de Elon Musk de los túneles exclusivos para autos, que solo replican una visión de segregación poblacional y autocentrista de la sociedad. En el capítulo siete, habla de como las empresas tecnológicas ahora tratan de apropiarse del recurso común de las banquetas, mediante las soluciones de "micromovilidad" o los vehículos autónomos de carga de última milla, entre otros servicios.
El octavo capítulo, habla sobre los futuros que las visiones tecnológicas de Silicon Valley crearían, es decir, generarían mayor segregación socioeconómica, acceso limitado a los recursos comunes y un transporte menos democrático.
El capitulo final, habla de ejemplos alrededor del mundo que van en contratendencia y pueden servir de guía para enfrentar estos futuros. Aunque deja en claro,que debe de venir acompañado de una mayor planeación, en especial de vivienda, porque se mezcla con fenómenos de gentrificación que generan mayor desigualdad social.
En las conclusiones finalmente llama a tomar acción por políticas de transporte pensadas en el bien común y de carácter democrático que lleven a mejores ciudades. El autor aclara que no es una visión anti-tecnología, sino del cómo se utiliza la tecnología y cuales son sus objetivos. Probablemente la parte menos desarrollada del libro es su posición política final, pues si bien es altamente critico a lo que la dinámica capitalista de estas empresas impulsa, pareciera que su posición es de carácter reformista.
Un libro altamente recomendado para interesados en temas de ciudad, de planeación urbana y de movilidad urbana, así como de tecnología y desigualdades. Uno que es totalmente relevante para el momento actual.
May 2, 2023
It's hard to imagine the world without cars...but it really wasn't so long ago. To Paris Marx's point, the automobile has been a luxury, a privilege , and our country has never been a mecca of equitable wealth.
At its best, Marx shares insights into the downside of ride sharing, automated driving, limited voice of those not able bodied, and the hubris of innovators like Elon Musk. Undoubtedly , we should be more concerned with road safety, modern trains, and concerned with limiting deaths on the road. Paris confirms he's not anti technology, but his argument is that marginalized peoples bear the consequences of the Silicon Valley elite.
I admire Marx's ardor and high minded principles. And yes, I believe he has only taken an uber once in his life (
https://youtu.be/KZAfcvOzQLg). But I found a lot of his arguments to be weak. Essentially he wants Silicon Valley to take on governing/socially conscious perspective. political. Calling firms like Uber parasitic and colonizers, when they are meeting a demand , including the social consciousness of its investors, seems unearned. Very little praise is given to these firms for job creation, progressivee vaims, and vastly improving most peoples lives. At its best paternal and at its worst blue meat
When we look at the solutions from Marx, socially conscious counties like France or Norway are praised for their visionary equalitiarian laws. Maybe the book is already dated, but you won't read a word about Biden's infrastructure plan or progressive cities like Chicago who have expanded bike lanes. I think stronger arguments would be made for how Silicon Valley has vastly improved our lives ..smart phones , ride sharing, hybrid vehicles and building a frictionless society are part of our blooming social world. He cities the poetic visions of Le Guin or Philip K. Dick, but offers little praise to the innovators and public that put their dollars behind them.
The problems Marx brings up are important. Segregated cities, unequal access to technology benefits, poor public transportation, and privatization of public spaces. But I don't think this book is going to share an accurate or complete story. Wouldn't it be more accurate to highlight the government's inefficiency or role in redlining. Interactions between government and commerce are limited to unions busting stories (proposal 22) and pitiful laments that we can't have meaningful interactions on sidewalks.
It's always easy to tear down, harder to down. There were plenty of naysayers for The Big Dig, the first plane, the digitization revolution. Easy to blame the people in charge for taking too much of the pie. But hey, even writers gotta pay for their rent and smartphones.
At its best, Marx shares insights into the downside of ride sharing, automated driving, limited voice of those not able bodied, and the hubris of innovators like Elon Musk. Undoubtedly , we should be more concerned with road safety, modern trains, and concerned with limiting deaths on the road. Paris confirms he's not anti technology, but his argument is that marginalized peoples bear the consequences of the Silicon Valley elite.
I admire Marx's ardor and high minded principles. And yes, I believe he has only taken an uber once in his life (
https://youtu.be/KZAfcvOzQLg). But I found a lot of his arguments to be weak. Essentially he wants Silicon Valley to take on governing/socially conscious perspective. political. Calling firms like Uber parasitic and colonizers, when they are meeting a demand , including the social consciousness of its investors, seems unearned. Very little praise is given to these firms for job creation, progressivee vaims, and vastly improving most peoples lives. At its best paternal and at its worst blue meat
When we look at the solutions from Marx, socially conscious counties like France or Norway are praised for their visionary equalitiarian laws. Maybe the book is already dated, but you won't read a word about Biden's infrastructure plan or progressive cities like Chicago who have expanded bike lanes. I think stronger arguments would be made for how Silicon Valley has vastly improved our lives ..smart phones , ride sharing, hybrid vehicles and building a frictionless society are part of our blooming social world. He cities the poetic visions of Le Guin or Philip K. Dick, but offers little praise to the innovators and public that put their dollars behind them.
The problems Marx brings up are important. Segregated cities, unequal access to technology benefits, poor public transportation, and privatization of public spaces. But I don't think this book is going to share an accurate or complete story. Wouldn't it be more accurate to highlight the government's inefficiency or role in redlining. Interactions between government and commerce are limited to unions busting stories (proposal 22) and pitiful laments that we can't have meaningful interactions on sidewalks.
It's always easy to tear down, harder to down. There were plenty of naysayers for The Big Dig, the first plane, the digitization revolution. Easy to blame the people in charge for taking too much of the pie. But hey, even writers gotta pay for their rent and smartphones.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 89 reviews