5 ms·

No mention of pedestrians, cyclists, or how cars (self driving or otherwise) affect the urban realm. So much of the self driving discussion seems to be wholly a

No mention of pedestrians, cyclists, or how cars (self driving or otherwise) affect the urban realm. So much of the self driving discussion seems to be wholly about the automobile technology in a bubble, with near zero thought put into the impacts on people, cities and society. The fact that the idea of signal less intersections, a concept that ignores the existence of pedestrians and cyclists entirely, is even a point of discussion is indicative that the discussion is focused on the wrong points.

agumonkey 10y ago
It's not zero. Lots of SDV talks mentioned impact of society altogether. Less crowded roads since cars could drive outside of rush hours. Different parking spot locations.
- nostrademons 10y ago
  Quite possibly no parking spot locations. A self-driving car service would drop off one passenger and then immediately move to pick up the next passenger. I suppose there'd still be parking lots to handle shifts in aggregate demand over the day, but they'd be well outside the city, in some barren desert land or garage.
  - agumonkey 10y ago
    You're already thinking two steps ahead. This would mean sharing SDV. I don't know if people still want to own cars or not. ps: a stream of e-SDV, possibly solar recharged would not be a sad thing for humanity.
    - Obi_Juan_Kenobi 10y ago
      Once people see the cost of ownership vs. sharing, I think the decision will be made for many. Ownership would likely persist at some level, but it's hard to imagine it as much more than a slim minority.
      - agumonkey 10y ago
        I mostly agree. That said, to some personalities, emotional attachment prevails. I can tell you I'd rather pay more than not "own" some stuff. I had to make room and sell the less useful things and it's gut thing, it's just hard. It's a part of me, of memories ... I think a car often fits this. That's what you took your girlfriend in, your kids to holidays, etc
- Svip 10y ago
  Wouldn't people still have to get to work during rush hours? I contend that it would be a smoother experience, but would it really be significantly less cars?
  - agumonkey 10y ago
    Car "could" go pick up kids, groceries at different times.
    - Svip 10y ago
      I am not going to leave the kids at home, hoping they get into the car and off to the daycare centre, so I am assuming you mean before I get to work. So that means I have to wait for the car to get back before I get to work? Wouldn't that just cost me additional fuel? Seems like a bit of a waste to have my car go out twice (or four times if we count both getting to work and home) every weekday. Isn't this a more likely scenario if the car was leased and/or it was a car pooling thing? But in that case, why are we wasting our times with cars? Why aren't we making buses self-driving? Car pool even more people in one vehicle! I can imagine a common type of vehicle for self-driving cars that will be popular would be 'small buses', ones that carry 8-12 people, that drive unique routes.
      - agumonkey 10y ago
        Buses are lacking privacy/familiar feel of your own van (considering you want to use one car for a larger amount of people). And it's harder to plan a route the more people in the vehicle. Now you have a point about kids safety. The car could still pick up and move things while you're busy, this means less time on the road when you are aka rush hours.
- seanmcdirmid 10y ago
  Not even that, but forget America for a second and think china. Overloaded roads, horrible traffic and pollution, chaos, immature driving culture with a much higher accident rate, parking as an extremely scarce commodity, ride sharing/taxis already very common, and, most importantly, an authoritarian government who can change the rules overnight. Driving actually doesn't suck that bad in the states, even in crowded cities like LA, but self driving cars could be transformative in a city like Beijing.
  - agumonkey 10y ago
    Good point, I admit having a very egocentric POV on the matter, I mostly picture things in Europe and US ... There are a lot of places elsewhere. That said, it's probable that EU and US will be the first markets to take off. Japan, China, India soon after. Also outside of cities, isolated places, if SD kits are affordable could enjoy regular refill.
    - seanmcdirmid 10y ago
      I'm not sure, I think Asia could be the first destination since they have the least vested interest in personal cars, and the most pressing problems that self driving cars could solve. The only issue is training the cars to deal with lawless pedestrians and e-bikes.
      - agumonkey 10y ago
        Possibly, but commpanies need to export/produce there, at an affordable price. I thought they'd plan to go for western markets first. If an asian company catches up fast then yeah it will move faster there.
        seanmcdirmid 10y ago
        The Chinese are working on self driving cars also. I hope the western company technology is allowed also, though. This is for the betterment of mankind after all.
potatolicious 10y ago
I agree with your point - though I'd also say that people who actually working in the field generally are considering these sorts of issues and are not blind to them. The "OMG only cars will exist and everything will be amazing because pedestrians are a fictional concept" crowd overwhelmingly seem to be wide-eyed futurists who don't actually have professional first-hand exposure to the field.
- Tiktaalik 10y ago
  There are people that are considering these issues, but I'm a bit concerned that I've only read insightful commentary on this issue from urban planners, which aren't going to be the ones creating self driving vehicles and advancing that tech forward. In contrast on the Silicon Valley side, I am disturbed by how many tweets and breezy blog posts I read from people that don't seem to know what Induced Demand is and don't seem to understand how cities work.
  - potatolicious 10y ago
    I share your concerns, though I'd also add that HN is a very self-selected group of people and not necessarily representative of the people having these conversations. Also, given the nature of the work and the insane level of competition right now, anyone working on this first-hand would be wise to not speak about these things in public. So the only commenters are urban planning and infrastructure folks who don't work first-hand on the problem - and fortunately they are writing extensively about it. People who have first-hand expertise on the matter are prevented from speaking extensively about it, which leaves the remainder of the commentary to the peanut gallery. And the peanut gallery is unfortunately filled with people whose visions of the future resemble more of the Jetsons than anything practical.
fullshark 10y ago
This article obviously punted on that question but that gets talked about constantly imo.
Obi_Juan_Kenobi 10y ago
Are there cycling/pedestrian advocacy groups that are against self-driving cars? I'm sure there's some concern about the early stages, but these groups are so acutely aware of the deficiencies of human driving that I find a lot of enthusiasm for automation. A driving infrastructure that's advanced as far as signal-less intersections is one that will almost certainly have dedicated space for human-powered transport. Automated driving, as a whole, appears to be far more compatible with peds and cyclists. As far as whether resources will be allocated to build the ped/cyclist friendly infrastructure, just ask any realtor what a 'walkable' neighborhood does to property values.
- Tiktaalik 10y ago
  The concern I have read from urban planners is more that autonomous cars are simply an improved variation of a car, and they won't actually fix many of the core problems that cars have created in cities. Autonomous cars absolutely have the potential to be much safer than human driven cars, but their innovations don't change many other aspects of car oriented transportation. It remains questionable then whether our cities will be all that different if the cars on the road are autonomously driven or not. In this sort of discussion I feel it must be added that it's fully possible to build walkable, bike friendly, cities right now with current technology. We just choose not to do so. We don't need new technologies to achieve this.
caf 10y ago
One thing to push for might be the idea that once you get to that far-off land of "all cars are autonomous, there are no traffic lights", pedestrians would have unlimited right of way such that you would be accustomed to just stepping out into a busy street and having all the vehicles stop for you.

agumonkey 10y ago

It's not zero. Lots of SDV talks mentioned impact of society altogether. Less crowded roads since cars could drive outside of rush hours. Different parking spot locations.

nostrademons 10y ago
Quite possibly no parking spot locations. A self-driving car service would drop off one passenger and then immediately move to pick up the next passenger. I suppose there'd still be parking lots to handle shifts in aggregate demand over the day, but they'd be well outside the city, in some barren desert land or garage.
- agumonkey 10y ago
  You're already thinking two steps ahead. This would mean sharing SDV. I don't know if people still want to own cars or not. ps: a stream of e-SDV, possibly solar recharged would not be a sad thing for humanity.
  - Obi_Juan_Kenobi 10y ago
    Once people see the cost of ownership vs. sharing, I think the decision will be made for many. Ownership would likely persist at some level, but it's hard to imagine it as much more than a slim minority.
    - agumonkey 10y ago
      I mostly agree. That said, to some personalities, emotional attachment prevails. I can tell you I'd rather pay more than not "own" some stuff. I had to make room and sell the less useful things and it's gut thing, it's just hard. It's a part of me, of memories ... I think a car often fits this. That's what you took your girlfriend in, your kids to holidays, etc
Svip 10y ago
Wouldn't people still have to get to work during rush hours? I contend that it would be a smoother experience, but would it really be significantly less cars?
- agumonkey 10y ago
  Car "could" go pick up kids, groceries at different times.
  - Svip 10y ago
    I am not going to leave the kids at home, hoping they get into the car and off to the daycare centre, so I am assuming you mean before I get to work. So that means I have to wait for the car to get back before I get to work? Wouldn't that just cost me additional fuel? Seems like a bit of a waste to have my car go out twice (or four times if we count both getting to work and home) every weekday. Isn't this a more likely scenario if the car was leased and/or it was a car pooling thing? But in that case, why are we wasting our times with cars? Why aren't we making buses self-driving? Car pool even more people in one vehicle! I can imagine a common type of vehicle for self-driving cars that will be popular would be 'small buses', ones that carry 8-12 people, that drive unique routes.
    - agumonkey 10y ago
      Buses are lacking privacy/familiar feel of your own van (considering you want to use one car for a larger amount of people). And it's harder to plan a route the more people in the vehicle. Now you have a point about kids safety. The car could still pick up and move things while you're busy, this means less time on the road when you are aka rush hours.
seanmcdirmid 10y ago
Not even that, but forget America for a second and think china. Overloaded roads, horrible traffic and pollution, chaos, immature driving culture with a much higher accident rate, parking as an extremely scarce commodity, ride sharing/taxis already very common, and, most importantly, an authoritarian government who can change the rules overnight. Driving actually doesn't suck that bad in the states, even in crowded cities like LA, but self driving cars could be transformative in a city like Beijing.
- agumonkey 10y ago
  Good point, I admit having a very egocentric POV on the matter, I mostly picture things in Europe and US ... There are a lot of places elsewhere. That said, it's probable that EU and US will be the first markets to take off. Japan, China, India soon after. Also outside of cities, isolated places, if SD kits are affordable could enjoy regular refill.
  - seanmcdirmid 10y ago
    I'm not sure, I think Asia could be the first destination since they have the least vested interest in personal cars, and the most pressing problems that self driving cars could solve. The only issue is training the cars to deal with lawless pedestrians and e-bikes.
    - agumonkey 10y ago
      Possibly, but commpanies need to export/produce there, at an affordable price. I thought they'd plan to go for western markets first. If an asian company catches up fast then yeah it will move faster there.
      - seanmcdirmid 10y ago
        The Chinese are working on self driving cars also. I hope the western company technology is allowed also, though. This is for the betterment of mankind after all.

potatolicious 10y ago

I agree with your point - though I'd also say that people who actually working in the field generally are considering these sorts of issues and are not blind to them. The "OMG only cars will exist and everything will be amazing because pedestrians are a fictional concept" crowd overwhelmingly seem to be wide-eyed futurists who don't actually have professional first-hand exposure to the field.

Tiktaalik 10y ago
There are people that are considering these issues, but I'm a bit concerned that I've only read insightful commentary on this issue from urban planners, which aren't going to be the ones creating self driving vehicles and advancing that tech forward. In contrast on the Silicon Valley side, I am disturbed by how many tweets and breezy blog posts I read from people that don't seem to know what Induced Demand is and don't seem to understand how cities work.
- potatolicious 10y ago
  I share your concerns, though I'd also add that HN is a very self-selected group of people and not necessarily representative of the people having these conversations. Also, given the nature of the work and the insane level of competition right now, anyone working on this first-hand would be wise to not speak about these things in public. So the only commenters are urban planning and infrastructure folks who don't work first-hand on the problem - and fortunately they are writing extensively about it. People who have first-hand expertise on the matter are prevented from speaking extensively about it, which leaves the remainder of the commentary to the peanut gallery. And the peanut gallery is unfortunately filled with people whose visions of the future resemble more of the Jetsons than anything practical.

fullshark 10y ago

This article obviously punted on that question but that gets talked about constantly imo.

Obi_Juan_Kenobi 10y ago

Are there cycling/pedestrian advocacy groups that are against self-driving cars? I'm sure there's some concern about the early stages, but these groups are so acutely aware of the deficiencies of human driving that I find a lot of enthusiasm for automation. A driving infrastructure that's advanced as far as signal-less intersections is one that will almost certainly have dedicated space for human-powered transport. Automated driving, as a whole, appears to be far more compatible with peds and cyclists. As far as whether resources will be allocated to build the ped/cyclist friendly infrastructure, just ask any realtor what a 'walkable' neighborhood does to property values.

Tiktaalik 10y ago
The concern I have read from urban planners is more that autonomous cars are simply an improved variation of a car, and they won't actually fix many of the core problems that cars have created in cities. Autonomous cars absolutely have the potential to be much safer than human driven cars, but their innovations don't change many other aspects of car oriented transportation. It remains questionable then whether our cities will be all that different if the cars on the road are autonomously driven or not. In this sort of discussion I feel it must be added that it's fully possible to build walkable, bike friendly, cities right now with current technology. We just choose not to do so. We don't need new technologies to achieve this.

caf 10y ago

One thing to push for might be the idea that once you get to that far-off land of "all cars are autonomous, there are no traffic lights", pedestrians would have unlimited right of way such that you would be accustomed to just stepping out into a busy street and having all the vehicles stop for you.