5 ms·

America's ultimate idiocy is to think the "transportation revolution" is autonomous cars.

by vtlynch 10y ago

barney54 10y ago
Well, autonomous cars have real advantages in terms of transportation flexibility and comfort. Those are two factors that are very important in people's transportation decisions.
- rhizome 10y ago
  On comfort, it's not going to be a robotic BMW that is used for autonomous traffic, it's going to be a robotic subcompact with fiberglass seats and can't be ruined by vomit. Think: carnival ride with a better seatbelts and airbags.
  - inimino 10y ago
    Think: Uber without the driver. Do you think the market for more comfortable transportation is just going to disappear or something?
    - rhizome 10y ago
      I think the profit motive will increase margins.
      - inimino 10y ago
        I think the profit motive would lead to somebody serving the top end of the market. People aren't going to give up their BMWs unless the experience is better.
        lmm 10y ago
        People will pick based on cost. Look at air travel: everyone bitches about the low-cost airlines with their narrow seats and $5 sandwiches, but they fly with them anyway.
        inimino 10y ago
        First, there isn't an individual plane coming to pick you up (not for most flyers). Second, you can still fly first class if you want a better experience. Most people don't buy BMWs either, but enough do that they stay in business. Uber doesn't compete with public transit by bus, either.
        rhizome 10y ago
        You mean like how Uber itself began with black cars only, then started moving further and further downmarket with increased investor pressure, even reaching the humiliating step of dealing in subprime loans? You're right to imply that initially there would (probably) be a luxury factor to get the sector off the ground -- what's the opposite of a loss leader? -- but the invisible hand reaches through the centuries and demands satisfaction, or so the story goes.
    - ethanbond 10y ago
      Uber hemorrhages cash. Why is this so hard for people to understand? It is not a business success and we shouldn't be modeling our infrastructure after it. It might be successful someday, maybe, but how about we wait until then.
      - inimino 10y ago
        The point is that there's a market for rides in nice cars. It's unreasonable to think that's going to suddenly go away if they become driverless.
        iamatworknow 10y ago
        I lease a car for about $200/month. I don't own it but until the lease is up it's my car. I can put the driver's seat the way I want and it stays there. I know where all the features are and how to use them. It's comfortable, clean, and smells nice. I find it hard to believe I'll still get all of this for the same relative price in a future when I'm renting rides from an autonomous fleet.
inimino 10y ago
You don't think it'll happen, or you don't think it'll be a revolution, or you're just arguing that we should prefer solutions that work today?
- lmm 10y ago
  It won't be a revolution. The fundamental constraint for our most economically productive zones is that you still need to unload x number of people in y time with z space available, and autonomous cars aren't any better at that than the regular kind. Look at the people walking across London Bridge or out of Cannon Street every morning, and imagine how much space it would take if each of them had to arrive in an individual car (or even 4 to a car) that had to pull over to unload them.
  - maxerickson 10y ago
    To me the hope isn't that self driving cars will fix transit problems, it's that they push more people away from car-first life decisions. (that's maybe a slightly hyperbolic phrase, but people that aren't dependent on owning a personal vehicle will make different choices)
    - lmm 10y ago
      In the dense cities where this matters most, people already don't own cars.
      - maxerickson 10y ago
        Sure, but the thought is more that it makes it easier to live in marginal car-less areas (which should then attract the investment to make them less marginal).
    - usrusr 10y ago
      I fully agree. If you can hail a robot at the price of driving using a car sharing service (as in short term rental, not as in "ride sharing"), the threshold to carless will fall a considerable bit. A lot more people are in the nearly-carless-but camp than actually carless. Current car sharing schemes only really work for short two way trips without much of a stay at the destination, since you would block the car for the whole duration. Robot taxis (just like their conventional counterparts) on the other hand could be booked separately for each direction,taking the duration of the stay out of the equation (except when it is so short that it is cheaper to keep the taxi waiting). Once on this level, it's just natural to replace the easy trips with public transportation.

America's ultimate idiocy is to think the "transportation revolution" is autonomous cars.

by vtlynch 10y ago

America's ultimate idiocy is to think the "transportation revolution" is autonomous cars.

Well, autonomous cars have real advantages in terms of transportation flexibility and comfort. Those are two factors that are very important in people's transportation decisions.

rhizome 10y ago
On comfort, it's not going to be a robotic BMW that is used for autonomous traffic, it's going to be a robotic subcompact with fiberglass seats and can't be ruined by vomit. Think: carnival ride with a better seatbelts and airbags.
- inimino 10y ago
  Think: Uber without the driver. Do you think the market for more comfortable transportation is just going to disappear or something?
  - rhizome 10y ago
    I think the profit motive will increase margins.
    - inimino 10y ago
      I think the profit motive would lead to somebody serving the top end of the market. People aren't going to give up their BMWs unless the experience is better.
      - lmm 10y ago
        People will pick based on cost. Look at air travel: everyone bitches about the low-cost airlines with their narrow seats and $5 sandwiches, but they fly with them anyway.
        inimino 10y ago
        First, there isn't an individual plane coming to pick you up (not for most flyers). Second, you can still fly first class if you want a better experience. Most people don't buy BMWs either, but enough do that they stay in business. Uber doesn't compete with public transit by bus, either.
      - rhizome 10y ago
        You mean like how Uber itself began with black cars only, then started moving further and further downmarket with increased investor pressure, even reaching the humiliating step of dealing in subprime loans? You're right to imply that initially there would (probably) be a luxury factor to get the sector off the ground -- what's the opposite of a loss leader? -- but the invisible hand reaches through the centuries and demands satisfaction, or so the story goes.
  - ethanbond 10y ago
    Uber hemorrhages cash. Why is this so hard for people to understand? It is not a business success and we shouldn't be modeling our infrastructure after it. It might be successful someday, maybe, but how about we wait until then.
    - inimino 10y ago
      The point is that there's a market for rides in nice cars. It's unreasonable to think that's going to suddenly go away if they become driverless.
      - iamatworknow 10y ago
        I lease a car for about $200/month. I don't own it but until the lease is up it's my car. I can put the driver's seat the way I want and it stays there. I know where all the features are and how to use them. It's comfortable, clean, and smells nice. I find it hard to believe I'll still get all of this for the same relative price in a future when I'm renting rides from an autonomous fleet.

inimino 10y ago

You don't think it'll happen, or you don't think it'll be a revolution, or you're just arguing that we should prefer solutions that work today?

lmm 10y ago
It won't be a revolution. The fundamental constraint for our most economically productive zones is that you still need to unload x number of people in y time with z space available, and autonomous cars aren't any better at that than the regular kind. Look at the people walking across London Bridge or out of Cannon Street every morning, and imagine how much space it would take if each of them had to arrive in an individual car (or even 4 to a car) that had to pull over to unload them.
- maxerickson 10y ago
  To me the hope isn't that self driving cars will fix transit problems, it's that they push more people away from car-first life decisions. (that's maybe a slightly hyperbolic phrase, but people that aren't dependent on owning a personal vehicle will make different choices)
  - lmm 10y ago
    In the dense cities where this matters most, people already don't own cars.
    - maxerickson 10y ago
      Sure, but the thought is more that it makes it easier to live in marginal car-less areas (which should then attract the investment to make them less marginal).
  - usrusr 10y ago
    I fully agree. If you can hail a robot at the price of driving using a car sharing service (as in short term rental, not as in "ride sharing"), the threshold to carless will fall a considerable bit. A lot more people are in the nearly-carless-but camp than actually carless. Current car sharing schemes only really work for short two way trips without much of a stay at the destination, since you would block the car for the whole duration. Robot taxis (just like their conventional counterparts) on the other hand could be booked separately for each direction,taking the duration of the stay out of the equation (except when it is so short that it is cheaper to keep the taxi waiting). Once on this level, it's just natural to replace the easy trips with public transportation.