• themusicman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Where does it say all roads? I think it’s pretty clear in context that they’re not suggesting that

      • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        A government adviser has called for roads in cities to be “ripped out completely” to combat air pollution.

        […]

        We should start changing our cities and actually start thinking about ripping out road infrastructure and turning them into green spaces or green transport corridors.

        • themusicman@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          And? I mean, sure it could technically be interpreted that way, but with only three words of the original quote, “all roads” is a pretty unkind reading IMO. More likely the article has deliberately introduced ambiguity to stoke exactly the outrage you exhibit.

          • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            7 months ago

            sure it could technically be interpreted that way

            How else would you interpret it (within the constrained context of this particular article, and not including anything from your pre-existing personal opinions)?

            More likely the article has deliberately introduced ambiguity

            Then why is this article here, and received positively by this community?

            the outrage you exhibit.

            projection, or else hyperbolae

            • candybrie@lemmy.world
              cake
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              7 months ago

              Ripped out completely as in actually remove them as opposed to closing them to vehicle traffic but still leaving the roads. Especially with that second quote.

              • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                7 months ago

                Ripped out completely as in actually remove them

                Yes, that’s how I read it also. That is an impractical idea because even if you can build a city that supports 95% of personal transit needs with public infrastructure, you will still need independently powered vehicles for logistics roles - so you will still need roads to drive them on. That is my whole point.