评论
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.
这可能会去往一个不同的非理想之地（也有历史先例）：在那里，快速实用的运输仅供那些付了钱的人使用。
Luckily, history also suggests a solution: mass transit.
幸运的是，历史也给出了一个解决办法：公共交通。
Ride-hailing services might introduce multi-passenger vehicles and split travel costs across riders (they could call them “buses”).
拼车服务可能会引入多个乘客乘坐同一车辆，并在乘客中分配出行成本（乘客可以称它们们为“公共汽车”）。
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，像耶鲁大学DR和DS所说的，政府可以借鉴这种新的运输生态系统达到他们自己的目的。
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).
他们可以补贴低收入工人的交通出行，或者完全接管这样的系统（开始作为私人企业对公共交通的统一收费，包括纽约地铁）。
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.
无人驾驶汽车的市政网络可能被证实比私人企业更为低效，尤其汽车是在先到先得的基础上实现配给，而不是价格。
But in the past city governments have felt that providing equal-opportunity access to centres of economic activity was worth the cost.
但是，在过去，城市政府感到为可以参与市中心的经济活动提供相同的机会是值得这样的代价。
Should congestion prove ineradicablein a driverless world, people will continue to hope for technological solutions, like the long-promised flying cars.
如果在无人驾驶的世界拥堵经验证无法根除，人们将继续对技术方法寄予希望，比如早就承诺的飞行汽车。
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.
当我们等待这些时——以及不久随之而来的空中拥堵——政府应该明智的维持地下系统良好运转。
译文来源余兴宇
