We have the technology, we need the political will. These scooters are nice but few people will brave riding them in a busy American street, not to even mention a highway.
This makes roads safer for bikes and scooters, but the NEV gives a car-like option for someone who can't (or won't) ride a bike.
Even a NEV-plus standard that allows up to 35mph would be an improvement, that would already cover almost all of my commute.
There are some solutions that can slow cars but still allow emergency vehicles through, but they aren't perfect, and still need sign off from the fire department. And that signoff can be hard to get, years ago, my neighborhood wanted to install speed humps to slow traffic -- the fire department vetoed it since the road was the main access from the neighhood firestation.
The main thing is: how bad are speed bumps for vehicle maintenance, really? Fire trucks, for example, only need to go full throttle when they leave the fire station.
When they come back they can just go over the speed bump slowly, like everyone else.
Why would going over 1 speed bump every bunch of days be such a major issue? Does that mean that a fire truck going over a pothole will do a barrel roll? :-p
But even for ambulances, if you couple traffic calming measures with bike lanes, better public transport, etc, car traffic goes way down, which means that ambulances aren't stuck in traffic. So even ambulances can slow down a bit before speed bumps and they would still arrive faster than otherwise.
That way you can avoid passthrough traffic.
Which is another way of saying 'willing voters.' Who all own cars already, for the most part. And rarely vote to reduce their own quality of life even if there is a possibility that in the longer run it will be higher.
You're likely reading this on a device that was invented while plenty of ignorant people were still not enlightened.
(I admit I may have worded my comment a bit better with a "that" - 'If innovation can't happen until the ignorant are enlightened we're never going to see that innovation.')
The costs are more than likely paid by others, which is why they're oblivious.
Far easier than convincing them would be to stop subsidizing them, sprawling car dependent suburbs are a giant money sink that the people living in them rarely pay for.
I can't imagine any developed city having the collective willpower to retrofit these sorts of paths into their city, though.
A lot of city centers in Europe have been closed to cars during the last decades but special trafic is still allowed.
It just works and it’s better for everybody.
And now I hope this will be extended outside of city centers.
RIP Europe, you will be sorely missed.
On a more serious note, ride sharing services are considered as taxis which are considered public transport and public transport is generally allowed at least on designated roads.
In Granada Spain I noticed that certain parts of the old city had physical barriers that could only be passed by a vehicle with the right NFC pass. Generally taxis, busses, and a few private cars that seemed to belong to people with property in the area. It made it very pleasant to walk around the old streets without having to suck down exhaust fumes of idling cars.
As you noted, Uber is a newer service, plenty of people happily lived their lives before it existed.
The international symbols show it's a pedestrian zone, and there's a rule of no stopping from 11-04 (no stopping meaning not even any loading/unloading, a stronger restriction than no parking.)
The text says "Residents excepted" (under the graffiti/sticker) and "Goods vehicles excepted 04-11" (so deliveries and rubbish collection in the morning) on all days including Sundays and public holidays.
50m down the cross-street on which the StreetView car is driving, there's the standard sign for no motor vehicles [2], and the text underneath says "Except for business" -- so this street can be used all day for delivery vehicles etc.
Both signs are enforced similar to parking: get caught, and you'll be fined. I'm sure you're less likely to be challenged if you're driving a van with "Plumber" written on the side, but it shouldn't matter.
No doubt it's more complicated in cities where this is enforced by cameras.
(In addition, the pedestrian streets are mostly conflicting one-way streets [3, and do a 360°]. No problem for a delivery, but useless as a shortcut.)
[1] https://www.google.com/maps/@55.6779772,12.5729422,3a,25.5y,...
[2] https://www.google.com/maps/@55.6772541,12.5737765,3a,23.2y,...
[3] https://www.google.com/maps/@55.6814522,12.5751944,3a,75y,12...
You walk or take transit within that area? In my experience European cities are super walkable within the core, never bothered with taxis or ride-sharing.