I won't presume to speak for Jack, but for me the anger is being cheated out of a future where things still had some measure of aesthetic appeal. Syd Mead drawings aren't the best example, (although I would love a world where whitewalls co-exist with walrus-dinosaurs and women with big hair) but the illustrations make the point. You're supposedly saving the planet, we should be able to give up a point of drag cocoefficient in the name of beauty. Packaging efficiency isn't even a concern because there is no CAFE "footprint" to dictate vehicle length. But I know that this isn't going to happen for two reasons...
1) The packaging efficiency of riding high isn't going back in the genie bottle. As soon as I asked a no-interest-in-cars friend how she liked her Durango, she sqealed, "I love being up so high!". So forget about anything resembling sleek.
2) Part of any good religion is martyrdom and the air of superiority that comes with it. If you look like you're enjoying your transport pod, it's like eating a lobster tail on a Friday during Lent.
Those of you who try to have it both ways... "I embrace my autonomous electric future! The rest of you are a bunch of old geezers." would do well to remember the words of Winston Churchill:
"Those who feed the crocodiles the most think they'll be eaten last."
By the same token, I'm not denying the future. I've no need to burn a calorie trying to stop or embrace it. That energy should be conserved to make sure things like Oregon's proposal to ban the sale of diesel never have a chance to gain traction. That and inventing ways to create liquid, atomized fuels without the aid of crude oil or a refinery. Consider that akin to learning how to re-load.