4 ms·

> This (driverless tech) is amazing for what it can do to help people that are old/poor and live in places with no public transport Reality check: if there's n

> This (driverless tech) is amazing for what it can do to help people that are old/poor and live in places with no public transport Reality check: if there's no public transport, driverless car services probably aren't about to serve those areas either.

konschubert 3y ago
Reality check: the main cost driver of bus service are driver salaries.
- littlestymaar 3y ago
  Even if it was true it would be a great argument for driverless bus, not for driverless cars. The original argument doesn't hold though: even if a bus line isn't profitable in a place because there's not enough people doesn't mean that a cheaper taxi service wouldn't be.
  - dash2 3y ago
    Rural areas often don't have enough passengers along routes to fill a bus, so the car is going to be better. (Doesn't have to be privately owned though.)
    - seanmcdirmid 3y ago
      Those areas often have buses to fulfill ADA requirements, so a lot of the riders are mobile challenged. Vans might work. Or those bigger taxi cabs that can take a wheelchair. I’m not sure how that could be self serve, however.
  - dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago
    It is true [1]. And clearly driverless technology applies to vehicles of various sizes. [1] "Depending on bus type, driver cost accounts for between 40 and 70 per cent of total bus operator cost in Singapore (Ongel et al., 2019) and Australia (own calculation based on ATC, 2006). In Japan, driver salaries account for 53% and 70% of total operating costs of buses and taxis, respectively (Abe, 2019)." https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2212012219300802 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S22120...
  - al_borland 3y ago
    Put that bus on rails instead of tires and operating it autonomously becomes infinitely easier and more realistic in the near term. As far as profits on rural lines… each line doesn’t need to be equally profitable. Some might even lose money, as long as the popular lines can make up for the less popular ones. There is a significant value to a community in having ubiquitous coverage.
    - konschubert 3y ago
      Building rails is harder than using the roads that already exist. It's always going to be a trade-off
      - al_borland 3y ago
        But is building rails harder than developing a self driving car/bus? We had rails 200 year ago; it’s a solved problem that mostly requires political will and capital allocation to execute. Self driving cars have been in development of some kind for at least 40 years[1] and it’s still a struggle technically, and will still require some political will going forward as we try to solve all the legal problem they bring up, and the development has also been very capital intensive[2]. If we have to spend the money and deal with the politics anyway, why not put that effort toward something we know works, we can do today, will reduce traffic on roads, and has a better safety record than automobiles. Augmenting a rail system with some kind of taxi system is fine, but it seems odd to put all the eggs in the autonomous car basket. We were promised cars would be driving themselves across the country 6 years ago, and it’s still just promises[3]. How long are we willing to wait for something that’s actually viable for the masses? And how much are we going to pay per ride? Right now it looks like it will be more expensive than hopping on a train. People often say Elon pitched the HyperLoop and Boring company ideas to try and kill rail plans, since he owns a car company. I have to wonder if these someday promises of self-driving are a similar tactic. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_self-driving_cars https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_self-driving_cars [2] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2022-10-06/even-after-100-billion-self-driving-cars-are-going-nowhere https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2022-10-06/even-afte... [3] https://www.notateslaapp.com/news/1474/elon-musk-says-tesla-will-attempt-autonomous-la-to-ny-drive-soon https://www.notateslaapp.com/news/1474/elon-musk-says-tesla-...
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago
Driverless vehicles will revolutionize public transport: - removes the biggest expense: drivers - works well with restricted area/route requirements - is flexible with respect to deployment of services in response to demand The ultimate goal of public transport should be that it is as flexible as a taxi (which is also public transport) with costs lower than buses or trains which have higher capital costs.
- jltsiren 3y ago
  ...and with as little traffic as with buses and trains. Constant traffic makes urban streets unpleasant. City life is better when the streets are mostly empty, with at most one or two vehicles per minute in each direction.
- bowsamic 3y ago
  In situations where 1 person is driving a bus averaging 10 people it hardly seems worth getting rid of the driver
- Larrikin 3y ago
  What about the economy post COVID has given you any hope that if private corporations are allowed to control the tech, that they will be cheaper than our current solution? Companies have done nothing but inflate profits mostly for making more profits. The nightmare scenario in self driving is if we can no longer own cars, but have to subscribe to car services, money from public transportation goes to private corporations, and they can raise profits or remove routes as they see fit for the most money.
- GaggiX 3y ago
  If everyone in the city took a taxi, the traffic would be unbearable, the city would be clogged, at least a standard European city. One thing I like about metro systems is that they usually take up no space on the ground, many of them are already completely autonomous, they cannot be stopped by manifestations or traffic, and of course they are much more space efficient for transporting people.
  - 3y ago

konschubert 3y ago

Reality check: the main cost driver of bus service are driver salaries.

littlestymaar 3y ago
Even if it was true it would be a great argument for driverless bus, not for driverless cars. The original argument doesn't hold though: even if a bus line isn't profitable in a place because there's not enough people doesn't mean that a cheaper taxi service wouldn't be.
- dash2 3y ago
  Rural areas often don't have enough passengers along routes to fill a bus, so the car is going to be better. (Doesn't have to be privately owned though.)
  - seanmcdirmid 3y ago
    Those areas often have buses to fulfill ADA requirements, so a lot of the riders are mobile challenged. Vans might work. Or those bigger taxi cabs that can take a wheelchair. I’m not sure how that could be self serve, however.
- dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago
  It is true [1]. And clearly driverless technology applies to vehicles of various sizes. [1] "Depending on bus type, driver cost accounts for between 40 and 70 per cent of total bus operator cost in Singapore (Ongel et al., 2019) and Australia (own calculation based on ATC, 2006). In Japan, driver salaries account for 53% and 70% of total operating costs of buses and taxis, respectively (Abe, 2019)." https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2212012219300802 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S22120...
- al_borland 3y ago
  Put that bus on rails instead of tires and operating it autonomously becomes infinitely easier and more realistic in the near term. As far as profits on rural lines… each line doesn’t need to be equally profitable. Some might even lose money, as long as the popular lines can make up for the less popular ones. There is a significant value to a community in having ubiquitous coverage.
  - konschubert 3y ago
    Building rails is harder than using the roads that already exist. It's always going to be a trade-off
    - al_borland 3y ago
      But is building rails harder than developing a self driving car/bus? We had rails 200 year ago; it’s a solved problem that mostly requires political will and capital allocation to execute. Self driving cars have been in development of some kind for at least 40 years[1] and it’s still a struggle technically, and will still require some political will going forward as we try to solve all the legal problem they bring up, and the development has also been very capital intensive[2]. If we have to spend the money and deal with the politics anyway, why not put that effort toward something we know works, we can do today, will reduce traffic on roads, and has a better safety record than automobiles. Augmenting a rail system with some kind of taxi system is fine, but it seems odd to put all the eggs in the autonomous car basket. We were promised cars would be driving themselves across the country 6 years ago, and it’s still just promises[3]. How long are we willing to wait for something that’s actually viable for the masses? And how much are we going to pay per ride? Right now it looks like it will be more expensive than hopping on a train. People often say Elon pitched the HyperLoop and Boring company ideas to try and kill rail plans, since he owns a car company. I have to wonder if these someday promises of self-driving are a similar tactic. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_self-driving_cars https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_self-driving_cars [2] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2022-10-06/even-after-100-billion-self-driving-cars-are-going-nowhere https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2022-10-06/even-afte... [3] https://www.notateslaapp.com/news/1474/elon-musk-says-tesla-will-attempt-autonomous-la-to-ny-drive-soon https://www.notateslaapp.com/news/1474/elon-musk-says-tesla-...
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago

Driverless vehicles will revolutionize public transport: - removes the biggest expense: drivers - works well with restricted area/route requirements - is flexible with respect to deployment of services in response to demand The ultimate goal of public transport should be that it is as flexible as a taxi (which is also public transport) with costs lower than buses or trains which have higher capital costs.

jltsiren 3y ago
...and with as little traffic as with buses and trains. Constant traffic makes urban streets unpleasant. City life is better when the streets are mostly empty, with at most one or two vehicles per minute in each direction.
bowsamic 3y ago
In situations where 1 person is driving a bus averaging 10 people it hardly seems worth getting rid of the driver
Larrikin 3y ago
What about the economy post COVID has given you any hope that if private corporations are allowed to control the tech, that they will be cheaper than our current solution? Companies have done nothing but inflate profits mostly for making more profits. The nightmare scenario in self driving is if we can no longer own cars, but have to subscribe to car services, money from public transportation goes to private corporations, and they can raise profits or remove routes as they see fit for the most money.
GaggiX 3y ago
If everyone in the city took a taxi, the traffic would be unbearable, the city would be clogged, at least a standard European city. One thing I like about metro systems is that they usually take up no space on the ground, many of them are already completely autonomous, they cannot be stopped by manifestations or traffic, and of course they are much more space efficient for transporting people.
- 3y ago