4 ms·

According to the article, Amsterdam was still built with bicycles in mind: > At the start of the 20th century, bikes far outnumbered cars in Dutch cities and t

by n2d4 3y ago

According to the article, Amsterdam was still built with bicycles in mind: > At the start of the 20th century, bikes far outnumbered cars in Dutch cities and the bicycle was considered a respectable mode of transport for men and women. But when the Dutch economy began to boom in the post-war era, more and more people were able to afford cars Amsterdam also has 50% higher population density than Los Angeles, despite housing much fewer people.

komali2 3y ago
Well fair enough, but I really don't think Americans should throw their hands up in the air and say "we just can't do it." This is the country that landed a man on the moon after all, it should be a solvable problem. Maybe the Europeans can't help with their own experience, but the American solution of "just add another lane" is self-evidently unsustainable. Something new is needed.
- n2d4 3y ago
  I agree, but self-driving cars (in the success case) are something new. More safety, less traffic, no more parking. I could see them make the way to Europe too (I'd love to have Waymos in my rural village, where cars are still common).
  - gambiting 3y ago
    >>less traffic, no more parking. These two goals are incompatible. If the idea is that self driving cars don't need to park, they can just drive around in circles until needed(which is an absolutely insane idea for a whole number of reasons, but let's stick with it for a second), then that will only increase not decrease traffic. >>I could see them make the way to Europe too I've love to see a Waymo navigate some narrow British roads where there is no road signage and there is no defined priority. Like, this is a real situation encountered on a road here by myself just few months ago, skip to 1:30 to see the interesting bit - I'd love to hear proponents of self driving cars explain to me exactly what the car would do in this case. Hand over to a remote operator? There is no signal there, sorry. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DO_OsjSRnEU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DO_OsjSRnEU
    - oakesm9 3y ago
      No idea what a driverless car would do, but that VW driver acts like they’ve never reversed in their life…
    - n2d4 3y ago
      Less traffic and no parking is compatible because there are fewer total cars, as Waymos are shared.
      - gambiting 3y ago
        I don't see any indication(other than some people on HN saying this) that people would not want to own a personal vehicle anymore just because self driving cars are a thing. Whether the car drives itself or not, people want to have their own personal space. Not to mention the (very common) need for things like child seats which don't really work with shared cars.
        n2d4 3y ago
        Well, that is Waymo's plan, which is explicitly a robotaxi, that this article is about. If we were talking about Teslas, the self-driving vision for instance would be different.
        gambiting 3y ago
        Well yes, let me rephrase that - I don't see any indication that people would switch to robotaxis over owning a personal vehicle. I see that now already - it would be cheaper for me to take a taxi(you know, normal human operated kind) to work every day and back than to own my own car. Once you add up the finance payments, insurance, maintanance and fuel, I could easily just Uber every day to work and back and it would actually save me money. I don't want to do that though, as I like the flexibility of owning my own car - and that feeling doesn't change even with robotaxis. Maybe I'm an outlier?
        n2d4 3y ago
- robertlagrant 3y ago
  It's simple: just level the US to be as flat as Amsterdam and bikes will be just as viable for a wide enough range of people.
- withinboredom 3y ago
  "just add another lane" actually makes traffic worse, not better. It's an interesting paradox that has been known for over a century. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braess%27s_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braess%27s_paradox

by n2d4 3y ago

komali2 3y ago

Well fair enough, but I really don't think Americans should throw their hands up in the air and say "we just can't do it." This is the country that landed a man on the moon after all, it should be a solvable problem. Maybe the Europeans can't help with their own experience, but the American solution of "just add another lane" is self-evidently unsustainable. Something new is needed.

n2d4 3y ago
I agree, but self-driving cars (in the success case) are something new. More safety, less traffic, no more parking. I could see them make the way to Europe too (I'd love to have Waymos in my rural village, where cars are still common).
- gambiting 3y ago
  >>less traffic, no more parking. These two goals are incompatible. If the idea is that self driving cars don't need to park, they can just drive around in circles until needed(which is an absolutely insane idea for a whole number of reasons, but let's stick with it for a second), then that will only increase not decrease traffic. >>I could see them make the way to Europe too I've love to see a Waymo navigate some narrow British roads where there is no road signage and there is no defined priority. Like, this is a real situation encountered on a road here by myself just few months ago, skip to 1:30 to see the interesting bit - I'd love to hear proponents of self driving cars explain to me exactly what the car would do in this case. Hand over to a remote operator? There is no signal there, sorry. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DO_OsjSRnEU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DO_OsjSRnEU
  - oakesm9 3y ago
    No idea what a driverless car would do, but that VW driver acts like they’ve never reversed in their life…
  - n2d4 3y ago
    Less traffic and no parking is compatible because there are fewer total cars, as Waymos are shared.
    - gambiting 3y ago
      I don't see any indication(other than some people on HN saying this) that people would not want to own a personal vehicle anymore just because self driving cars are a thing. Whether the car drives itself or not, people want to have their own personal space. Not to mention the (very common) need for things like child seats which don't really work with shared cars.
      - n2d4 3y ago
        Well, that is Waymo's plan, which is explicitly a robotaxi, that this article is about. If we were talking about Teslas, the self-driving vision for instance would be different.
        gambiting 3y ago
        Well yes, let me rephrase that - I don't see any indication that people would switch to robotaxis over owning a personal vehicle. I see that now already - it would be cheaper for me to take a taxi(you know, normal human operated kind) to work every day and back than to own my own car. Once you add up the finance payments, insurance, maintanance and fuel, I could easily just Uber every day to work and back and it would actually save me money. I don't want to do that though, as I like the flexibility of owning my own car - and that feeling doesn't change even with robotaxis. Maybe I'm an outlier?
        n2d4 3y ago
robertlagrant 3y ago
It's simple: just level the US to be as flat as Amsterdam and bikes will be just as viable for a wide enough range of people.
withinboredom 3y ago
"just add another lane" actually makes traffic worse, not better. It's an interesting paradox that has been known for over a century. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braess%27s_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braess%27s_paradox