2 ms·
Or, your car parks in the spot you yourself would park in, the ones building codes require the restaurant to provide. No one wants their $60k+ self driving car
by elif 4y ago
Or, your car parks in the spot you yourself would park in, the ones building codes require the restaurant to provide.
No one wants their $60k+ self driving car casually risking accidents. And I certainly don't want to end my date night with drunk/messy Uber patron roulette for like $10 profit. Not hating if you do.. just not for me.
- Dylan16807 4y ago> Or, your car parks in the spot you yourself would park in, the ones building codes require the restaurant to provide. In that case it sounds like the self-driving doesn't matter and we're no worse off.
- elif 4y agoagree. there's a lot of neo-luddite FUD on HN about self-driving. plenty of actual academics project that autonomous vehicles improve occupancy of city streets by 40% and highways by 80%. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/8317654 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/8317654
- bluGill 4y agoI've seen those, but they make a lot of assumptions that I do not think are reasonable. Only time will tell.
- brenns10 4y agoIf there was already plentiful parking at your destination then the whole "cruising for parking" discussion is moot anyway, right? The concerns were about congested commutes to denser downtown areas where parking is difficult, or the date night into the city from the suburbs, etc. Difficult/expensive parking disincentivizes car trips there, and shifts them to public transit, ride share, and commuter rail, which are better suited for cities. If you weren't encountering difficulty finding street parking or paying steep garage prices, then of course you wouldn't suddenly be sending your AV on a joyride around town or letting random people use it as car share.