評論
打印
That might lead to a different kind of dystopia (also with historical antecedents): one in which fast, functional transport is available only to those who can pay.
這可能會去往一個不同的非理想之地（也有歷史先例）：在那里，快速實用的運輸僅供那些付了錢的人使用。
Luckily, history also suggests a solution: mass transit.
幸運的是，歷史也給出了一個解決辦法：公共交通。
Ride-hailing services might introduce multi-passenger vehicles and split travel costs across riders (they could call them “buses”).
拼車服務可能會引入多個乘客乘坐同一車輛，并在乘客中分配出行成本（乘客可以稱它們們為“公共汽車”）。
Or, as Daniel Rauch and David Schleicher of Yale University argue, governments might instead co-optthe new transport ecosystem for their own purposes.
或者，像耶魯大學DR和DS所說的，政府可以借鑒這種新的運輸生態系統達到他們自己的目的。
They might subsidise the travel of low-income workers, or take over such systems entirely (a common fate for mass-transit systems which begin life as private enterprises, including the NewYork subway).
他們可以補貼低收入工人的交通出行，或者完全接管這樣的系統（開始作為私人企業對公共交通的統一收費，包括紐約地鐵）。
Municipal networks of driverless cars might prove less efficient than private ones, particularly if cars are rationed on a first-come-first-served basis rather than by price.
無人駕駛汽車的市政網絡可能被證實比私人企業更為低效，尤其汽車是在先到先得的基礎上實現配給，而不是價格。
But in the past city governments have felt that providing equal-opportunity access to centres of economic activity was worth the cost.
但是，在過去，城市政府感到為可以參與市中心的經濟活動提供相同的機會是值得這樣的代價。
Should congestion prove ineradicablein a driverless world, people will continue to hope for technological solutions, like the long-promised flying cars.
如果在無人駕駛的世界擁堵經驗證無法根除，人們將繼續對技術方法寄予希望，比如早就承諾的飛行汽車。
While we wait for that—and the clotted skyways that would soon follow—governments would be wise to keep their underground systems in good working order.
當我們等待這些時——以及不久隨之而來的空中擁堵——政府應該明智的維持地下系統良好運轉。
譯文來源余興宇
