4 ms·

This IS public transit. Public transit without the last mile (or in LA, the last 5 miles) problem. This freedom-supporting tech also thwarts the tyranny inheren

This IS public transit. Public transit without the last mile (or in LA, the last 5 miles) problem. This freedom-supporting tech also thwarts the tyranny inherent in public transit (schedules, robbing your life with all the waiting, limited load carrying capacity, forced interactions with antisocial individuals, etc.)

so33 9y ago
But there is still a last mile problem, you have to enter and exit out of the tunnels. That's the last mile. Or do you suggest that tunnel building will become so viable from an economic and engineering standpoint that everyone will have an entry point in their garage? > This freedom-supporting tech also thwarts the tyranny inherent in public transit (schedules, robbing your life with all the waiting, limited load carrying capacity, forced interactions with antisocial individuals, etc.) Funny you don't mention the tyranny inherent in single-occupancy vehicles: Robbing your life having to find parking. Paying to park your car (if you live or work downtown). The antisocialness of sitting in your car for 1-2 hours a day with just NPR as your only friend. The inherent inflexibility of SOV travel, where your car carries just 20% of the designed capacity most of the time. And finally, the infrastructure that has to be built to support cars, driverless or not, zipping around everywhere, making it harder to walk or bike to where you want to go.
- josephpmay 9y ago
  No last mile problem, as in your autonomous vehicle will drive the last mile
  - ktta 9y ago
    The last mile problem isn't about difficulty to drive, it is about congestion. Tunnels, however long they maybe to take advantage of the speed, must end. At the endpoint is where the problems start with trying to accommodate capacity everyone thinks it'll achieve.
- CodeWriter23 9y ago
  I guess you missed the 125mph speed in the tunnel, thus decreasing that 1-2 hour commute to about 9 minutes or less. Or, 20 times faster than even the best crammed in a sardine can public transit. The idea of public transit being redefined as 6-8 passenger vehicles you get paired with at the bus stop that then use the tunnel network to decrease transit time for those who need to use public transit is also absent from your retort. As is the honesty about the typical case for public transit, non-peak. This case in the tunnel system suddenly realized for a fraction of the cost because vehicles are on-demand instead of driving a mostly empty big ass bus (or light rail car) on a route according to a schedule. It's basically for public transit what streaming is for TV. Also, all of the things you describe as "tyranny" are actually choices, making them "freedom", the opposite of "tyranny". I've lived in Los Angeles for almost 35 years and I've never chosen a 1+ hour commute, though you are free to if you choose. I also don't choose to go to the parking insane areas. Again, your choice. But there is little choice with current public transit solutions. You go where they tell you when they tell you and that's that. And don't forget your mandatory sampling of the, I'll put it nicely, culture du jour.
  - kuschku 9y ago
    I recommend you first try mass transit in Berlim, Tokyo, Singapore,etc before discussing this. Your impression of mass transit seems to be very biased due to the american fuckups with them.
- gfodor 9y ago
  nobody said that cars are the only thing that these sleds would shuttle around. use your imagination a bit and i think you can probably imagine how this can be use for a public transit system.
yongjik 9y ago
I do love the "freedom" of driving to Lake Tahoe once a year or so, but it's a patently silly adjective for describing people commuting between two fixed points (home and work), at a fixed hour, five times a week. Which is what all these urban traffic ideas are trying to solve, basically. I don't think all those people stuck at I-680 have a deep love of staring at the next car's bumper for two hours every day. Re-branding it as "freedom" doesn't make the experience particularly palatable.
- CodeWriter23 9y ago
  Hmmmm....if only there were a proposed way to increase the speed for those poor souls from 8MPH to 125MPH.
  - kuschku 9y ago
    Yes, it's called a subway. Being on average 5-10x faster than a car in a city, having stops every 5min walking time, having someone else who always keeps it clean instead of you, and allowing you to still do something or read something instead of driving. It's cheaper, faster (the time spent on the car elevator is a massive reduction in efficiency for Musks system), and you don't have to own or clean a car. Go visit Tokyo someday, and try their mass transit.
cname 9y ago
> ...schedules, robbing your life with all the waiting, limited load carrying capacity, forced interactions with antisocial individuals, etc. Reading this, the first thing that comes to mind is daily traffic in the city. Rush hours are scheduled. You spend so much time waiting at lights, in traffic jams, etc. The roads are congested due to inherent capacity limits. And you're forced to interact with antisocial individuals speeding, texting, making dangerous lane changes, etc. 30 to 40 thousand people are killed every year in car crashes [in the US alone]. Millions are injured. I think I'd rather take my chances with the occasional "antisocial" person on public transit. Of course, given the ubiquity of cars and the massive (socialized) infrastructure to support them, they are useful sometimes. There's also the fact that in many place you're practically forced to own a car (or at least are convinced that you absolutely need one (or two)). How is that not "tyrannical"?

so33 9y ago

But there is still a last mile problem, you have to enter and exit out of the tunnels. That's the last mile. Or do you suggest that tunnel building will become so viable from an economic and engineering standpoint that everyone will have an entry point in their garage? > This freedom-supporting tech also thwarts the tyranny inherent in public transit (schedules, robbing your life with all the waiting, limited load carrying capacity, forced interactions with antisocial individuals, etc.) Funny you don't mention the tyranny inherent in single-occupancy vehicles: Robbing your life having to find parking. Paying to park your car (if you live or work downtown). The antisocialness of sitting in your car for 1-2 hours a day with just NPR as your only friend. The inherent inflexibility of SOV travel, where your car carries just 20% of the designed capacity most of the time. And finally, the infrastructure that has to be built to support cars, driverless or not, zipping around everywhere, making it harder to walk or bike to where you want to go.

josephpmay 9y ago
No last mile problem, as in your autonomous vehicle will drive the last mile
- ktta 9y ago
  The last mile problem isn't about difficulty to drive, it is about congestion. Tunnels, however long they maybe to take advantage of the speed, must end. At the endpoint is where the problems start with trying to accommodate capacity everyone thinks it'll achieve.
CodeWriter23 9y ago
I guess you missed the 125mph speed in the tunnel, thus decreasing that 1-2 hour commute to about 9 minutes or less. Or, 20 times faster than even the best crammed in a sardine can public transit. The idea of public transit being redefined as 6-8 passenger vehicles you get paired with at the bus stop that then use the tunnel network to decrease transit time for those who need to use public transit is also absent from your retort. As is the honesty about the typical case for public transit, non-peak. This case in the tunnel system suddenly realized for a fraction of the cost because vehicles are on-demand instead of driving a mostly empty big ass bus (or light rail car) on a route according to a schedule. It's basically for public transit what streaming is for TV. Also, all of the things you describe as "tyranny" are actually choices, making them "freedom", the opposite of "tyranny". I've lived in Los Angeles for almost 35 years and I've never chosen a 1+ hour commute, though you are free to if you choose. I also don't choose to go to the parking insane areas. Again, your choice. But there is little choice with current public transit solutions. You go where they tell you when they tell you and that's that. And don't forget your mandatory sampling of the, I'll put it nicely, culture du jour.
- kuschku 9y ago
  I recommend you first try mass transit in Berlim, Tokyo, Singapore,etc before discussing this. Your impression of mass transit seems to be very biased due to the american fuckups with them.
gfodor 9y ago
nobody said that cars are the only thing that these sleds would shuttle around. use your imagination a bit and i think you can probably imagine how this can be use for a public transit system.

yongjik 9y ago

I do love the "freedom" of driving to Lake Tahoe once a year or so, but it's a patently silly adjective for describing people commuting between two fixed points (home and work), at a fixed hour, five times a week. Which is what all these urban traffic ideas are trying to solve, basically. I don't think all those people stuck at I-680 have a deep love of staring at the next car's bumper for two hours every day. Re-branding it as "freedom" doesn't make the experience particularly palatable.

CodeWriter23 9y ago
Hmmmm....if only there were a proposed way to increase the speed for those poor souls from 8MPH to 125MPH.
- kuschku 9y ago
  Yes, it's called a subway. Being on average 5-10x faster than a car in a city, having stops every 5min walking time, having someone else who always keeps it clean instead of you, and allowing you to still do something or read something instead of driving. It's cheaper, faster (the time spent on the car elevator is a massive reduction in efficiency for Musks system), and you don't have to own or clean a car. Go visit Tokyo someday, and try their mass transit.

cname 9y ago

> ...schedules, robbing your life with all the waiting, limited load carrying capacity, forced interactions with antisocial individuals, etc. Reading this, the first thing that comes to mind is daily traffic in the city. Rush hours are scheduled. You spend so much time waiting at lights, in traffic jams, etc. The roads are congested due to inherent capacity limits. And you're forced to interact with antisocial individuals speeding, texting, making dangerous lane changes, etc. 30 to 40 thousand people are killed every year in car crashes [in the US alone]. Millions are injured. I think I'd rather take my chances with the occasional "antisocial" person on public transit. Of course, given the ubiquity of cars and the massive (socialized) infrastructure to support them, they are useful sometimes. There's also the fact that in many place you're practically forced to own a car (or at least are convinced that you absolutely need one (or two)). How is that not "tyrannical"?