5 ms·

Ah ok, I'll check it out. I'm curious if self-driving Ubers would be a step change tho, or if we would observe the same thing. Edit: because if we half self-dr

Ah ok, I'll check it out. I'm curious if self-driving Ubers would be a step change tho, or if we would observe the same thing. Edit: because if we half self-driving cars, do we also get self-driving buses and now we can have a lot more bus routes? Is lack (or cost) of labor one thing that holds back the number of buses we have? Could we have more mini buses? Just curious how much the labor factors into the transit options we have. Maybe it doesn't that much, I don't know.

ghaff 4y ago
I assume with autonomous driving, scheduled and computer dispatched minibuses/shuttle buses would be more common. Labor is a fairly large component of public transit. Of course, you don't remotely eliminate that for various reasons but reducing the need for drivers almost certainly makes alternative forms of transit more economical.
mewpmewp2 4y ago
There could be a huge algorithm which will try to schedule vehicles with varying sizes from 2 seats to 30 seats to people all over the city. If you pay more you can get the exact N spots so you get privacy, if you are willing to pay the least, you might have to go 30m into a dedicated spot where a 30 seater will stop for you and some others, then it will make optimised stops based on what everyone has as their destinations.
- danny_codes 4y ago
  Ngl this sounds much worse than normal public transportation. AFAIK it's just the same thing but if you're rich you get special treatment. Imo more of a regression than an advance. Cars were largely a mistake.
  - mewpmewp2 4y ago
    You get special treatment when you are rich already now. It's more advanced and optimal version of what there is now. Right now if you are rich you can just hire a driver and a luxury car, and be much more wasteful with your resources, so I don't see the difference in terms of inequality.
  - dotancohen 4y ago
    If done properly, the rich people's transportation could subsidize the poor people's transportation to an extent.

ghaff 4y ago

I assume with autonomous driving, scheduled and computer dispatched minibuses/shuttle buses would be more common. Labor is a fairly large component of public transit. Of course, you don't remotely eliminate that for various reasons but reducing the need for drivers almost certainly makes alternative forms of transit more economical.

mewpmewp2 4y ago

There could be a huge algorithm which will try to schedule vehicles with varying sizes from 2 seats to 30 seats to people all over the city. If you pay more you can get the exact N spots so you get privacy, if you are willing to pay the least, you might have to go 30m into a dedicated spot where a 30 seater will stop for you and some others, then it will make optimised stops based on what everyone has as their destinations.

danny_codes 4y ago
Ngl this sounds much worse than normal public transportation. AFAIK it's just the same thing but if you're rich you get special treatment. Imo more of a regression than an advance. Cars were largely a mistake.
- mewpmewp2 4y ago
  You get special treatment when you are rich already now. It's more advanced and optimal version of what there is now. Right now if you are rich you can just hire a driver and a luxury car, and be much more wasteful with your resources, so I don't see the difference in terms of inequality.
- dotancohen 4y ago
  If done properly, the rich people's transportation could subsidize the poor people's transportation to an extent.