8 ms·

Driving – An extinction event

52 points by awjr 10y ago

throw2016 10y ago
A car has more function than just going about your daily life. It gives you freedom to go wherever you please as long as there is a road. You as an individual might never use this freedom but it is there and many people take advantage of it. Same with a horse or a bicycle but with a car you can go further and with few restrictions. Giving this up because of the temporary convenience of self driving cars even if we assume the technology is here is a poor trade because as we have seen repeatedly with technology comes obsessive surveillance and control. And busy bodies love to impose rules and restrictions once it becomes possible. And these will be on the free movement of people. So its important to consider the ramnifications and tradeoffs and move carefully and with societal consensus rather than because some VCs are bullish on self driving technology or because the technology exists.
- nathanaldensr 10y ago
  Americans take their freedoms for granted. We Americans haven't experienced war on our soil within living memory. In general, America is safe and individuals have enormous freedom. I worry that the younger among us are ushering in more and more technology, and, as you stated, with that technology will come surveillance and an easier means for corporations and government to inspect, analyze, and control our lives. Hand-waving these concerns is naive and demonstrates a lack of knowledge and understanding of history and just how evil people in positions of power can be.
  - zero_iq 10y ago
    > with that technology will come surveillance and... Wrong tense. This has already happened. What 'will come' is more of it.
    - nathanaldensr 10y ago
      You're right; I should've said additional surveillance.
- pg314 10y ago
  Mobile phone penetration is at 80% in the US. The surveillance potential of mobile phones is bigger than of self driving cars, in my opinion: most mobile phone users have their phone with them every waking minute. That doesn't mean that your concern is invalid, but it looks like the majority of the population doesn't care that much. I also see the upsides of self-driving electric cars as more important: fewer traffic victims, less space dedicated to cars, less pollution.
- neutronicus 10y ago
  Yeah, having a car means I can walk up a mountain no one's gonna über to...
- wojcikstefan 10y ago
  > A car has more function than just going about your daily life. It gives you freedom to go wherever you please as long as there is a road. Agreed. The way I understand it, a self-driving car will offer you the same freedom - you'll just tell it where to take you instead of driving it yourself.
  - tomjen3 10y ago
    It will if you own it, but a lot of people here seems to assume that most cars will be short-term rentals.
    - freehunter 10y ago
      Just because most cars would be rentals doesn't mean owning a car wouldn't still be possible. And if you want to own a car, you could just own a car. My city has short-term bike rentals to get around, but plenty of people still own their own bikes.
Reason077 10y ago
I am optimistic that self-driving technology and electrification will go along way towards addressing the negative externalities (safety, pollution, congestion, noise) of motor vehicles in the coming decades. In the mean time, the real problem with urban speed limits in the UK is that there is very little enforcement. Speed limits are meaningless because they are widely ignored. This blog post suggests that might be about to change, at least in Birmingham. As a driver, pedestrian, and cyclist, I think that's a very good thing.
- fennecfoxen 10y ago
  I don't know about enforcement frequency, but what I have seen here is that there is a lot of traffic calming, and deliberately engineered chokepoints where traffic must slow down considerably or stop for cars heading in the opposite direction. This isn't just central London, either, but in the suburbs. The complex junctions with multiple islands for pedestrian crossings (often carefully fenced such that you _have to_ cross at the zebra stripes proper) are another difference from the US, and structurally contribute to this effect.
- rm_-rf_slash 10y ago
  Be careful what you wish for. In the US, small-town cops use speeding tickets as a way to get funding that simply won't appear from its tax base. It's extremely common to see police cars at speed changes to catch people who dont see or slow down in time.
  - kilotaras 10y ago
    But the solution to that should be decoupling money that goes to department from fines, not dismantling of speed limit enforcing altogether.
- runarberg 10y ago
  While I do think that drivers that speed should be ticketed, I have to note that it is a really expensive and ineffective way to reduce speed. A simpler and more effective solution is to alter the roads in such a way that people simply do not drive faster than x k∕h. You can do it by narrowing the road, adding a roundabout, elevated crosswalks, a bike-lane separated with pretty flower pots, etc.
djhworld 10y ago
This is why I would never cycle in London, ever.
- skdhslkdjb 10y ago
  surprizingly it's actually safer than cycling on country roads! Most drivers in London are polite and vigilant whereas they will actively try to kill you in the country.
  - jrf6 10y ago
    Cycling (and driving) in the city is safer in part because the cars aren't going very fast. They aren't going very fast because they can't. There are simply too many obstacles in the city, whether speed humps, narrow roads, crosswalks, four-way stops, or heavy traffic. I believe this is why DC has the lowest traffic fatality rate in the US [1], despite the near-universal belief that driving in the city is dangerous. [1] http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/general-statistics/fatalityfacts/state-by-state-overview http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/general-statistics/fatalit...
  - Doctor_Fegg 10y ago
    Most drivers on country backroads where I live (Cotswolds, UK) are safe and respectful. The dangerous places are provincial towns/cities - worked and cycled in a large Staffordshire town for six years, it was horrid - and rural A roads, but any decent cycle route planner (ie not GMaps) will keep you off the latter for the most part.
    - freehunter 10y ago
      The dangerous part is a car coming over a hill or around a bend and not seeing the slow cyclist in front of them until it's too late. Not that the drivers are actively looking to injure the cyclists, but that the speed differential between bicycles and autos leads to terrible accidents.
- xapata 10y ago
  I've had a wonderful time cycling in London.
lacampbell 10y ago
I view driving as a kind of bad habit. I mean it's very easy to see the appeal. You get to travel long distances at great speed in your own private sitting room. They are amazing tools. I think the real issue is we overuse them and develop a huge dependency on them. And people in general are completely blind to their downsides.
spunker540 10y ago
I'm mostly tired of reading all the self-driving hype by now- I know it's coming and its gonna be great. But I had never thought about the ramifications for police forces before! I think a decent amount of government revenue will be lost and not as many officers required nationwide. Most people's only crimes end up being driving-related. And many arrests start with being pulled over too- dui's, drug possession, outstanding warrant etc.
- xapata 10y ago
  Many people don't realize how much of government has been crafted to support the automobile industry, effectively a subsidy. The obvious one is building roads, but we should also consider how laws have taken rights away from pedestrians and pedestrian-friendly builders. For example, many cities won't allow a new building without a parking lot moat.
  - XorNot 10y ago
    That's because the results of not doing this are pretty reliably dreadful on surrounding traffic. This is just sensible town-planning.
    - barrkel 10y ago
      That's not true. The parking lot moats discourage density and make walking a real chore. The lack of density makes public transport less economical. Allocating enormous amounts of space to parking virtually guarantees that more people will drive.
      - freehunter 10y ago
        Chicken and egg. You can't have one store decide to not have a parking lot, because no one would go there. You could require all stores to be densely packed with no parking lots, but you can't force existing businesses to move or rip out their parking lots, so that would fail too. Believe it or not, we actually have businesses that are so dense that walking between them not only makes sense, it's the only way to get around. They're called "shopping malls" and everyone hates them.
atemerev 10y ago
Sorry, but I, personally, enjoy cars and driving, observe speed limits, and you, good sir, can take my steering wheel from my cold, dead hands. If you want cooperation and understanding from us drivers, you'd want to stop patronizing, negging and insulting us. Otherwise, you'd be ignored at best.
- to3m 10y ago
  I hear ignoring them is the first step.
id122015 10y ago
How could driving go extinct? Whith all these self driving cars, who is going to fix the broken tires when it happens? What broken tires ? And if men enjoy driving, who can stop them ?
- freehunter 10y ago
  >And if men enjoy driving, who can stop them ? The government. The government stops a lot of people from doing a lot of things they enjoy because those things pose a danger to society. That's like 90% of the reason the government exists. >who is going to fix the broken tires when it happens? Mechanics. Just like they do today. There's nothing different about the tires on a self-driving car than on any other car.
kylehotchkiss 10y ago
I've been in the most horrifying accident most people can think of... rollover at 80mph because some random guy chased me down down the highway and rammed me off the road. I was scared for a while, but I still love driving. More things will be electric in a few years, sure. Maybe we need more stern punishments for distracted driving. Maybe we need some more assistance to prevent us from going off the road when we are sleepy. But I think people will enjoy driving for the same reason they enjoy tube amps, it's not perfect, but it has a warmth and human element of imperfection to it and people might just like that.
- ra1n85 10y ago
  >But I think people will enjoy driving for the same reason they enjoy tube amps, it's not perfect, but it has a warmth and human element of imperfection to it and people might just like that. Agreed. I enjoy the feel of a combustion engine, the sounds, and the drama. Particularly so from forced induction engines. I know electric is coming, and in many ways is already better, but it lacks the personality that I enjoy in driving (for now, at least).
  - freehunter 10y ago
    Horses had an even stronger personality, but we manged to find joy in horseless carriages too.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- ArkyBeagle 10y ago
  I sincerely hope that you followed up and did everything you could to see that [expletive deleted] in jail.
  - kylehotchkiss 10y ago
    Wish that was the case, but it was a poor southern country and he didn't show up to court so they dropped the charges :(

52 points by awjr 10y ago

throw2016 10y ago

A car has more function than just going about your daily life. It gives you freedom to go wherever you please as long as there is a road. You as an individual might never use this freedom but it is there and many people take advantage of it. Same with a horse or a bicycle but with a car you can go further and with few restrictions. Giving this up because of the temporary convenience of self driving cars even if we assume the technology is here is a poor trade because as we have seen repeatedly with technology comes obsessive surveillance and control. And busy bodies love to impose rules and restrictions once it becomes possible. And these will be on the free movement of people. So its important to consider the ramnifications and tradeoffs and move carefully and with societal consensus rather than because some VCs are bullish on self driving technology or because the technology exists.

nathanaldensr 10y ago
Americans take their freedoms for granted. We Americans haven't experienced war on our soil within living memory. In general, America is safe and individuals have enormous freedom. I worry that the younger among us are ushering in more and more technology, and, as you stated, with that technology will come surveillance and an easier means for corporations and government to inspect, analyze, and control our lives. Hand-waving these concerns is naive and demonstrates a lack of knowledge and understanding of history and just how evil people in positions of power can be.
- zero_iq 10y ago
  > with that technology will come surveillance and... Wrong tense. This has already happened. What 'will come' is more of it.
  - nathanaldensr 10y ago
    You're right; I should've said additional surveillance.
pg314 10y ago
Mobile phone penetration is at 80% in the US. The surveillance potential of mobile phones is bigger than of self driving cars, in my opinion: most mobile phone users have their phone with them every waking minute. That doesn't mean that your concern is invalid, but it looks like the majority of the population doesn't care that much. I also see the upsides of self-driving electric cars as more important: fewer traffic victims, less space dedicated to cars, less pollution.
neutronicus 10y ago
Yeah, having a car means I can walk up a mountain no one's gonna über to...
wojcikstefan 10y ago
> A car has more function than just going about your daily life. It gives you freedom to go wherever you please as long as there is a road. Agreed. The way I understand it, a self-driving car will offer you the same freedom - you'll just tell it where to take you instead of driving it yourself.
- tomjen3 10y ago
  It will if you own it, but a lot of people here seems to assume that most cars will be short-term rentals.
  - freehunter 10y ago
    Just because most cars would be rentals doesn't mean owning a car wouldn't still be possible. And if you want to own a car, you could just own a car. My city has short-term bike rentals to get around, but plenty of people still own their own bikes.

Reason077 10y ago

I am optimistic that self-driving technology and electrification will go along way towards addressing the negative externalities (safety, pollution, congestion, noise) of motor vehicles in the coming decades. In the mean time, the real problem with urban speed limits in the UK is that there is very little enforcement. Speed limits are meaningless because they are widely ignored. This blog post suggests that might be about to change, at least in Birmingham. As a driver, pedestrian, and cyclist, I think that's a very good thing.

fennecfoxen 10y ago
I don't know about enforcement frequency, but what I have seen here is that there is a lot of traffic calming, and deliberately engineered chokepoints where traffic must slow down considerably or stop for cars heading in the opposite direction. This isn't just central London, either, but in the suburbs. The complex junctions with multiple islands for pedestrian crossings (often carefully fenced such that you _have to_ cross at the zebra stripes proper) are another difference from the US, and structurally contribute to this effect.
rm_-rf_slash 10y ago
Be careful what you wish for. In the US, small-town cops use speeding tickets as a way to get funding that simply won't appear from its tax base. It's extremely common to see police cars at speed changes to catch people who dont see or slow down in time.
- kilotaras 10y ago
  But the solution to that should be decoupling money that goes to department from fines, not dismantling of speed limit enforcing altogether.
runarberg 10y ago
While I do think that drivers that speed should be ticketed, I have to note that it is a really expensive and ineffective way to reduce speed. A simpler and more effective solution is to alter the roads in such a way that people simply do not drive faster than x k∕h. You can do it by narrowing the road, adding a roundabout, elevated crosswalks, a bike-lane separated with pretty flower pots, etc.

djhworld 10y ago

This is why I would never cycle in London, ever.

skdhslkdjb 10y ago
surprizingly it's actually safer than cycling on country roads! Most drivers in London are polite and vigilant whereas they will actively try to kill you in the country.
- jrf6 10y ago
  Cycling (and driving) in the city is safer in part because the cars aren't going very fast. They aren't going very fast because they can't. There are simply too many obstacles in the city, whether speed humps, narrow roads, crosswalks, four-way stops, or heavy traffic. I believe this is why DC has the lowest traffic fatality rate in the US [1], despite the near-universal belief that driving in the city is dangerous. [1] http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/general-statistics/fatalityfacts/state-by-state-overview http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/general-statistics/fatalit...
- Doctor_Fegg 10y ago
  Most drivers on country backroads where I live (Cotswolds, UK) are safe and respectful. The dangerous places are provincial towns/cities - worked and cycled in a large Staffordshire town for six years, it was horrid - and rural A roads, but any decent cycle route planner (ie not GMaps) will keep you off the latter for the most part.
  - freehunter 10y ago
    The dangerous part is a car coming over a hill or around a bend and not seeing the slow cyclist in front of them until it's too late. Not that the drivers are actively looking to injure the cyclists, but that the speed differential between bicycles and autos leads to terrible accidents.
xapata 10y ago
I've had a wonderful time cycling in London.

lacampbell 10y ago

I view driving as a kind of bad habit. I mean it's very easy to see the appeal. You get to travel long distances at great speed in your own private sitting room. They are amazing tools. I think the real issue is we overuse them and develop a huge dependency on them. And people in general are completely blind to their downsides.

spunker540 10y ago

I'm mostly tired of reading all the self-driving hype by now- I know it's coming and its gonna be great. But I had never thought about the ramifications for police forces before! I think a decent amount of government revenue will be lost and not as many officers required nationwide. Most people's only crimes end up being driving-related. And many arrests start with being pulled over too- dui's, drug possession, outstanding warrant etc.

xapata 10y ago
Many people don't realize how much of government has been crafted to support the automobile industry, effectively a subsidy. The obvious one is building roads, but we should also consider how laws have taken rights away from pedestrians and pedestrian-friendly builders. For example, many cities won't allow a new building without a parking lot moat.
- XorNot 10y ago
  That's because the results of not doing this are pretty reliably dreadful on surrounding traffic. This is just sensible town-planning.
  - barrkel 10y ago
    That's not true. The parking lot moats discourage density and make walking a real chore. The lack of density makes public transport less economical. Allocating enormous amounts of space to parking virtually guarantees that more people will drive.
    - freehunter 10y ago
      Chicken and egg. You can't have one store decide to not have a parking lot, because no one would go there. You could require all stores to be densely packed with no parking lots, but you can't force existing businesses to move or rip out their parking lots, so that would fail too. Believe it or not, we actually have businesses that are so dense that walking between them not only makes sense, it's the only way to get around. They're called "shopping malls" and everyone hates them.

atemerev 10y ago

Sorry, but I, personally, enjoy cars and driving, observe speed limits, and you, good sir, can take my steering wheel from my cold, dead hands. If you want cooperation and understanding from us drivers, you'd want to stop patronizing, negging and insulting us. Otherwise, you'd be ignored at best.

to3m 10y ago
I hear ignoring them is the first step.

id122015 10y ago

How could driving go extinct? Whith all these self driving cars, who is going to fix the broken tires when it happens? What broken tires ? And if men enjoy driving, who can stop them ?

freehunter 10y ago
>And if men enjoy driving, who can stop them ? The government. The government stops a lot of people from doing a lot of things they enjoy because those things pose a danger to society. That's like 90% of the reason the government exists. >who is going to fix the broken tires when it happens? Mechanics. Just like they do today. There's nothing different about the tires on a self-driving car than on any other car.

kylehotchkiss 10y ago

I've been in the most horrifying accident most people can think of... rollover at 80mph because some random guy chased me down down the highway and rammed me off the road. I was scared for a while, but I still love driving. More things will be electric in a few years, sure. Maybe we need more stern punishments for distracted driving. Maybe we need some more assistance to prevent us from going off the road when we are sleepy. But I think people will enjoy driving for the same reason they enjoy tube amps, it's not perfect, but it has a warmth and human element of imperfection to it and people might just like that.

ra1n85 10y ago
>But I think people will enjoy driving for the same reason they enjoy tube amps, it's not perfect, but it has a warmth and human element of imperfection to it and people might just like that. Agreed. I enjoy the feel of a combustion engine, the sounds, and the drama. Particularly so from forced induction engines. I know electric is coming, and in many ways is already better, but it lacks the personality that I enjoy in driving (for now, at least).
- freehunter 10y ago
  Horses had an even stronger personality, but we manged to find joy in horseless carriages too.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
ArkyBeagle 10y ago
I sincerely hope that you followed up and did everything you could to see that [expletive deleted] in jail.
- kylehotchkiss 10y ago
  Wish that was the case, but it was a poor southern country and he didn't show up to court so they dropped the charges :(