There is a concern that focusing on technological advancements may distract us from addressing a fundamental issue: reducing our reliance on cars. After years of prioritizing automobiles in transportation planning, the United States is now facing negative consequences such as pollution, traffic, accidents, urban sprawl, and limited transportation options. Instead of simply replacing cars with different models, we should consider restructuring society to decrease our dependence on them. The author reflects on the potential risks and benefits of placing faith in technology, inspired by Peter Norton's book which highlights the history of unfulfilled promises from car manufacturers and tech companies. In the post-World War II era, various technologies such as radio waves, divided highway engineering, transistors, and repurposed technology from targeted bombs were proposed as solutions to create an ideal automobile society where anyone could drive anywhere, park for free, and avoid accidents. However, these technologies were not successful in achieving this vision, and according to Norton, driverless cars are unlikely to succeed either. Many driverless car proponents now acknowledge that the technology is not yet ready for widespread use on roads. Norton believes that the reliance on high-tech solutions may not always be the best approach. Our health and the health of the planet will see a notable improvement if we transition to electric vehicles. This topic is a key focus at the global climate summit in Glasgow, Scotland. Removing error-prone drivers from the roads could also enhance safety. However, simply improving cars is not a complete solution. Promoting electric vehicles may increase reliance on cars, as stated by Farhad Manjoo in a New York Times Opinion piece. The possibility of driverless cars could lead to an increase in miles driven, potentially worsening traffic and urban sprawl. While Uber and similar services were expected to reduce congestion and decrease driving distances, they had the opposite effect. Moving forward, the focus should be on developing safer and more fuel-efficient vehicles. However, there is also a need to invest in making walking, cycling, and shared transportation more affordable and attractive options. Norton is discussing a concept that may seem like something imagined by Greta Thunberg. The automobile is seen as a crucial convenience, and shifting away from it will be a challenging, expensive, and controversial endeavor. However, it is important to consider making this change because the current transportation system is hazardous and not environmentally friendly, while also consuming a significant amount of public resources. The United States was constructed with the car as a central focus over many years. It was a decision, sometimes a disputed one, that could now be changed. Norton suggested considering what would occur if a portion of the extravagant funds used for driverless car development were instead invested in simpler products and policy adjustments. He proposed altering zoning laws to allow for more residences to be constructed near stores, schools, and offices to reduce the need for excessive driving. Additionally, he praised bicycles and battery-free electric railways as technological wonders that provide greater benefits than any driverless car technology. Speaking with Norton made me reflect on the pros and cons of innovation. We are aware that technology enhances our lives. However, we are also aware that placing too much faith in technology can prevent us from addressing the underlying issues causing our problems. © 2021 The New York Times Company.