Business Owners Are Using AI-Generated 'Concerned Residents' To Fight Proposed Bus Line In Toronto
- Reference: 0177696623
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/25/05/22/2334228/business-owners-are-using-ai-generated-concerned-residents-to-fight-proposed-bus-line-in-toronto
- Source link:
> A group of Bathurst business owners are bent out of shape over a recent proposal for priority transit lanes between Eglinton Avenue and Lake Shore Boulevard, part of the city's new RapidTO program. According to the city, the transit lanes would shave up to 7 minutes off some trips during peak commuting hours. It's good news for anyone who has ever cursed the TTC while waiting to catch a bus in inclement weather. Of course, the added convenience for transit commuters would come at a slight cost for drivers, requiring the removal of at least 138 paid street parking spaces to make way for the new lanes. Opposition to the development has sprung up under the banner of Protect Bathurst, a group of hopping mad local business owners claiming that the lack of street parking will make shopping a nightmare for car-bound customers and will cause problems for people with mobility issues.
>
> Notably, Protect Bathurst has no spokesperson or contact info listed on its website. The page is registered to a food marketing consultant employed by Summerhill Market and looks eerily similar to Protect Dufferin, another group of "concerned residents" advocating for the same cause. But this cookie-cutter approach goes even further: author and urbanist Shawn Micallef has [2]found that the people speaking out in the group's allegedly grassroots [3]videos appear to be AI-generated. Brad McMullen, the president of Summerhill Market, which opened an outpost on Bathurst in 2019, says he doesn't know anything about the campaign's use of AI. He says he isn't necessarily opposed to the new bus lanes but believes that three weeks' notice from the city is not enough time for his business to adapt. "We purchased and invested in this location because of the available street parking, and then we figured out the loading situation, which happens on the street," he says. "I don't think Summerhill Market would work here with these bus lanes."
[1] https://torontolife.com/city/bathurst-business-owners-are-using-ai-generated-concerned-residents-to-fight-a-proposed-bus-lane/
[2] https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:zivafxyd4qecgvqg3bozligg/post/3lpnf5goou22z
[3] https://www.instagram.com/p/DJt9yBtRPCF/
How is this not fraud? (Score:2)
It seems like this qualifies as something that is blatantly illegal.
Re: (Score:2)
What laws would this violate? Unethical sure, blatantly illegal? In what way? /. is filled with posters that would celebrate this if it were to their benefit. Lying, cheating and gaming is business as usual, it's only an outrage when someone else does it. We live in an era of social media that is manipulated on a massive scale with bots, and yet this is not only wrong but "blatantly illegal". Hmmm.
Street parking does not signifcantly affect busine (Score:2)
Businesses love street parking, but repeated studies show street parking does not significantly affect sales.
The problem is cars are huge. Most businesses get one or two places in front of them, with other stores using up the rest of the slots. Given sales per hour, this is basically irrelevant.
For stores that sell light stuff, the added foot traffic from bus stops will more than make up for street parking.
For things that sell heavy gear, a free delivery program is practically a necessity unless you have h
Re: (Score:2)
> Businesses love street parking, but repeated studies show street parking does not significantly affect sales.
Yet almost every city that shittified its Downtown with bike lanes, ends up being a stinking mess: Portland, San Francisco, Seattle, Vancouver.
Re: (Score:2)
Right, because you don't benefit from bike lanes. They didn't go in for your benefit.
And since when is this about bike lanes? Or is it just about you?
Re: (Score:2)
> Right, because you don't benefit from bike lanes.
Sure. But the thing is, in all of these cities, bike lanes (on average) carry fewer people than the car lanes they replaced. I FOIA-d Seattle's DOT and the bike lanes in Downtown often carry 10-100 _times_ fewer people than the car lanes.
> And since when is this about bike lanes? Or is it just about you?
I want my city to be liveable for people, not a playground for bike bros.
Re: (Score:2)
The people who get the most infuriated about bike lanes are the same people who drive into the city once or twice a year.
Re: (Score:2)
I live in a city that is being choked to death by bike lanes. The misery pushers have recently completely destroyed a street just 2 blocks from me with a bike lane, so now there's a constant traffic jam there after 3pm. And usually not a single bike in sight.
Re: (Score:2)
What you did there was pick a few cities that had bike lanes and claimed they are a "stinking mess. " No definitions, no statistics, no actual evidence, just a bunch of unsupported beliefs that disagree with mine. Mine are based on statistics and actual news reporting rather than rando guys talking on the internet.
Stating your opinion without any evidence is just you being loud, not convincing. It makes me think less of you, not less of bike lanes.
Show me things like this if you want to participate in
Re: (Score:2)
> More bikes = Reduced congestion: [1]https://www.cbc.ca/news/scienc [www.cbc.ca]... [www.cbc.ca]
Lies. Bike lanes _at_ _best_ are neutral. Long term, they INCREASE congestion in the _US_ in every study. Heck, even Toronto's misery pushers had to hand-wave it by repeating "COVID COVID COVID": [2]https://www.toronto.ca/wp-cont... [toronto.ca]
Paris, Amsterdam, whatever. I don't live there, and I care about the country where I'm living.
> More bikes = less deaths: [3]https://www.peopleforbikes.org... [www.peopleforbikes.org] [peopleforbikes.org]
I have an even better way: ban bikes in cities in the US. No bikes = no bike deaths. Meanwhile, the traffic speed will improve, and the city will be much better.
[1] https://www.cbc.ca/news/scienc
[2] https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/8fb5-BWCEDashboardFinal-AODA.pdf
[3] https://www.peopleforbikes.org.../
Re: (Score:2)
> I have an even better way: ban bikes in cities in the US. No bikes = no bike deaths. Meanwhile, the traffic speed will improve, and the city will be much better.
Way more people die in vehicles compared to riding bikes. How about we also ban cars and save an order of magnitude more lives?
Re: (Score:2)
> Way more people die in vehicles compared to riding bikes.
Not the point. My point is: banning bikes will solve the bike the deaths problem. Immediately and completely.
> How about we also ban cars and save an order of magnitude more lives?
Agreed. Once we have a reasonable replacement. I think, within the next 5-10 years once Waymo expands.
Re: (Score:2)
> My point is: banning bikes will solve the bike the deaths problem. Immediately and completely.
Ok, but that was just a joke, not a serious point to make in a discussion about bike lanes. If you put all the people using bikes in cares that increases congestion.
> I think, within the next 5-10 years once Waymo expands.
Self driving cars aren't an alternative that would help with congestion or really anything. For people driving from outside the city into it, the cars still need to be parked or there would be basically rush hour traffic all day, so there's little benefit for them. For people going from place to place in a city, they're basically just expensi
Re: (Score:2)
> Ok, but that was just a joke, not a serious point to make in a discussion about bike lanes.
Not a joke. It's a position based on actual facts.
> If you put all the people using bikes in cares that increases congestion.
And not the lies like the one that you're telling. Bikes and transit do NOT decrease congestion in the US. Certainly, not in Seattle where I live. I have the data from our local DoT, bike lanes routinely carry 10-100 _times_ fewer passengers than the car lanes that they replaced.
It's also funny reading the blogs saying "study after study" and failing flat when asked to cite the studies from the US (and not the ones looking at Manhattan). E.g.: [1]https://pmc. [nih.gov]
[1] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8997564/
Re: (Score:2)
> Not a joke. It's a position based on actual facts.
Oh. Wow so you really made an absolutely stupid statement like that and expected people would take you seriously?
Yikes.
Now you're trying to say that replacing a car with a bike lowers congestion? When you say "bike" are you thinking of a "bus"? Bikes are the little single person vehicles that you peddle.
Re: (Score:2)
> Now you're trying to say that replacing a car with a bike lowers congestion?
No. I'm saying that adding bike _lanes_ increases congestion. And that's a fact. For a simple reason: people HATE biking for commutes. So the bike lanes end up being under-utilized compared to car lanes in the US. Example: Seattle fucked up the traffic with bike lanes, yet the percentage of bike commutes has not changed within a decade. It's floats around 2-4% depending on the study methodology.
> When you say "bike" are you thinking of a "bus"? Bikes are the little single person vehicles that you peddle.
Bikes are misery generators, that most people buy, thinking about how great it's to ride into the wind in the ligh
Good for drivers (Score:2)
Good for them. Transit is nothing but a misery generator. Fight it, and especially bike lanes. Once bike lanes start choking the streets, it's game over for the liveability.
Re: (Score:2)
oh yeah, and bitch about bike lanes again. Why not just get rid of the cars? They're just a misery generator that causes cities to be a stinking mess. The moment you let cars on the streets you get hobos shitting on your front door.
Re: (Score:2)
Cars are what makes the US cities work. They allow people to prosper, by providing access to VASTLY better living conditions and to more potential workplaces. Dense cities force people to live like rats in a box. There's simply no way for transit to work with truly liveable environments (suburbs).
Re: (Score:2)
Some people like living in areas where they don't have to get in a car to drive 20 minutes to go places. Cities have more workplaces and more housing. The housing can be of varied sizes based on what people want. If you're the type that needs a giant lawn to mow then city life isn't for you, but hundreds of millions think otherwise
Re: (Score:2)
this is nonsense
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry for your hard childhood. You probably think that 15 square meters per person is plenty of space to live.
Re: (Score:2)
What are you even babbling about?
Re: (Score:2)
See? You don't even understand what you're missing. Cars provide the US an absolutely unique advantage: people can live in comfortable individual single-family houses, while at the same time having access to more potential employers than people in dense cities.
It absolutely is an advantage that misery pushers just never even think of. You can't start a company in a garage, when you don't _have_ a garage.
All bot traffic soon (Score:2)
As cost to produce generate AI approaches zero, the chance to produce your own propaganda is now just about your time, so this is predictable and expect alot more ... this is just influencing ... couldn't you do this in Google notebook LM? In 5 minutes ?
Re: (Score:2)
The internet isn't going to be all bot traffic. But it will be heavy bot traffic around certain issues that someone is motivated enough to spin up about. That makes it more insidious, as you can still talk to real people and even do that the majority of the time. But in that brief, critical moment when you hear about "white genocide in South Africa", or the virtues of the latest crapcoin, it'll be a bot.
The problem is... (Score:2)
Toronto has a lot of roads that are heavily used. It's a multi-million person city, and the planning around traffic has rarely been logically addressed. Developers have influenced the city leaders to permit building new developments with very little setback from the street, no dedicated off-street loading areas, and very little concern for any congestion they cause, all to maximize profit.
The usage of street space has not been done logically: It's been VERY political, and pandered to many special interest g
No-one is serious (Score:2)
Bicycles are mostly recreation and not used during rain or snow. Current eco-friendly "transit" is a PR stunt. Most businesses don't have bike racks for visitors or employees. The few that do, shove them out of sight where parked bikes are exposed to the weather and vandals. Shopping-carts / prams for bicycles are expensive and require their own parking, which no-one provides. If cities want bicycles, e-scooters, e-bikes to be the norm, a massive amount of resources must be allocated to parking and pre
AI really is the most anti-social tech (Score:2)
I think our species has ever developed. I mean there's worse things like nuclear bombs but when it comes to just fucking up society and civilization I don't think llms can be beat. Honestly I think it's worse than social media.
I guess if you want to count the invention of propaganda there's that but that's been around since we invented religion so. I mean I guess it is technically a technology but I don't think of it as such since it's thousands of years old.
I definitely am not so sure we're going t
Re: (Score:2)
How is "AI" at fault here?
Modern capitalism, based on grift, corruption and lying is the problem, not the technology.
So many examples of similar tricks without "AI" are available that I'm curious why would one try to divert attention from the real problem to the tool it is manifested through.