4 ms·

Agreed, but self-driving cars would enable self driving buses and they could be great. One problem with buses is that paying the drivers is expensive. As a res

Agreed, but self-driving cars would enable self driving buses and they could be great. One problem with buses is that paying the drivers is expensive. As a result buses need to be big to amortize the cost of the driver across lots of users. But big buses don't work well in low demand times of the day. The only option is to run them less frequently, which sucks for users. And big buses don't fit down small streets. And fewer larger buses means fewer routes. Self driving buses could solve all these problems. I'd still prefer to walk or cycle, but I'm probably biased because I live in a warm, dry and flat part of the UK and don't have kids.

ggoo 6y ago
Couldn't we already have self driving buses if we just put them on tracks? They go a predefined route anyway :)
- toast0 6y ago
  Roads are cheaper than rails, and easier to change. Buseses on wheels are more flexible than trams or whatever on tracks, and can route around a collision. Rails in the road are a severe hazard for cyclists and somewhat hazardous for pedestrians.
  - ggoo 6y ago
    (sarcasm)
kanox 6y ago
> Agreed, but self-driving cars would enable self driving buses and they could be great. Self-driving cars would enable self-driving taxis which would be superior to both private vehicles and public transport. Imagine if there was no need to park and you could summon a vehicle of the appropriate size at will.
- abainbridge 6y ago
  I have a theory that large fleets of self-driving taxis will make congestion worse (compared to private cars). They have to drive to you, then drive wherever you want to go, turning one vehicle journey into two ( * ). There are lots of other factors to consider but that seems to be a fundamental problem with the taxi model. I'd be interested in replies that explain the flaw in this theory. I assume it is wrong because I haven't heard anyone else say it. * It could be even worse. Imagine the morning rush - thousands of taxis have driven to peoples' homes and then driven them to their work/school. Then most will have to park until the next peak of demand in the evening. Either they park in the city, or they drive to an out-of-city parking lot, then drive back in to collect, then drive people home, then drive somewhere else to park until the morning rush. What would have been two vehicle journeys using a private car became six.
poulsbohemian 6y ago
>I'd still prefer to walk or cycle, but I'm probably biased because I live in a warm, dry and flat part of the UK and don't have kids. I'm glad you said this because it's a key point so many in this thread appear to miss: what works for one person or locale is not the solution for another, therefore cars aren't going away but this does not negate the legitimacy of bikes or trains either.

ggoo 6y ago

Couldn't we already have self driving buses if we just put them on tracks? They go a predefined route anyway :)

toast0 6y ago
Roads are cheaper than rails, and easier to change. Buseses on wheels are more flexible than trams or whatever on tracks, and can route around a collision. Rails in the road are a severe hazard for cyclists and somewhat hazardous for pedestrians.
- ggoo 6y ago
  (sarcasm)

kanox 6y ago

> Agreed, but self-driving cars would enable self driving buses and they could be great. Self-driving cars would enable self-driving taxis which would be superior to both private vehicles and public transport. Imagine if there was no need to park and you could summon a vehicle of the appropriate size at will.

abainbridge 6y ago
I have a theory that large fleets of self-driving taxis will make congestion worse (compared to private cars). They have to drive to you, then drive wherever you want to go, turning one vehicle journey into two ( * ). There are lots of other factors to consider but that seems to be a fundamental problem with the taxi model. I'd be interested in replies that explain the flaw in this theory. I assume it is wrong because I haven't heard anyone else say it. * It could be even worse. Imagine the morning rush - thousands of taxis have driven to peoples' homes and then driven them to their work/school. Then most will have to park until the next peak of demand in the evening. Either they park in the city, or they drive to an out-of-city parking lot, then drive back in to collect, then drive people home, then drive somewhere else to park until the morning rush. What would have been two vehicle journeys using a private car became six.

poulsbohemian 6y ago

>I'd still prefer to walk or cycle, but I'm probably biased because I live in a warm, dry and flat part of the UK and don't have kids. I'm glad you said this because it's a key point so many in this thread appear to miss: what works for one person or locale is not the solution for another, therefore cars aren't going away but this does not negate the legitimacy of bikes or trains either.