3 ms·
Exactly, I don't understand why people think self driving cars will do anything to reduce congestion -- if anything they are going to make it worse since they m
by Johnny555 9y ago
Exactly, I don't understand why people think self driving cars will do anything to reduce congestion -- if anything they are going to make it worse since they make point-to-point car trips easier and cheaper, and instead of driving to work and parking all day, the cars will drive someone to work, then drive somewhere else to get another rider (or park to await the evening commute).
They may bring some efficiency to traffic patterns leading to better road utilization, but that only goes so far to make up for the much higher level of traffic that will result when it's much cheaper and easier to call a car when you want one.
San Francisco is already feeling the "Uber effect" of greater traffic from car-share services:
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/San-Francisco-traffic-Uber-Lyft-SFMTA-blame-10791265.php http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/San-Francisco-traffic-...
- dexterdog 9y agoIs Uber really comparable? With Uber each vehicle is trying to be in the busiest place to get a fare operating only in its own self-interest. With an autonomous fleet they will be where they need to be and will get out of the way on their own.
- Johnny555 9y agoWhy would the motivations of a driverless car company be more altruistic than that of an Uber driver? An idle car makes no money, fleet owners will send their cars where they are more likely to get a fare. Even if the cars are privately owned and people just have their car come in to drop them off at work before sending them out of the way to park somewhere (since inner city parking is scarce, so there's no space to park every car at the worker's building), that doubles the number of trips -- once to drop them off, and once to go somewhere and park.
- dexterdog 9y agoBut a company will not put two cars in the same place to compete for one fare. And the remote parking may double the number of trips, but the parking is not going to be far away and will take much less space than a normal parking lot.
- marcosdumay 9y agoFleet owners will send as many cars as they need into the fullest places, and as many cars as need into the emptier ones. Uber drivers are each one out for themselves, so they can't do any global optimization.
- maxerickson 9y agoThe incentives are different. Robo fleet wants to maximize fleet utilization. Uber driver wants to maximize utilization of 1 car.
- sliverstorm 9y agoI don't understand why people think... Everybody loves the idea of new technology that allows them to continue doing what they are doing, in this case avoiding biking, walking, and public transit. Basically, people want to believe self driving cars will reduce congestion. Ergo, it's pretty easy to convince them it will.
- mmanfrin 9y agoThat "Uber effect" is a circular citation. SFGate is reporting that SFMTA says Uber/Lyft are causing traffic (SFMTA has an agenda), and in their 'report' they cite SF Chronicle (the 'newsier' site of SFGate) as evidence for the claim that Uber and Lyft are to blame: http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/nevius/article/More-ride-options-doesn-t-mean-less-traffic-9139929.php http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/nevius/article/More-ride-... That article provides no evidence to support this claim other than the fact that 37k people have driven for Uber/Lyft/et al in SF. The author then extrapolates that adding 37k drivers to SF is a huge number. As if all those drivers appeared in SF ex nihilo.