3 ms·

Yeah, I mean using this tech for a fleet of self driving, point-to-point taxis as public transit makes sense to me. A bus on the usual fixed routes? Not reall

by gedy 2y ago

Yeah, I mean using this tech for a fleet of self driving, point-to-point taxis as public transit makes sense to me. A bus on the usual fixed routes? Not really.

stego-tech 2y ago
Because point-to-point self-driving taxis are a fool’s errand. They don’t alleviate congestion, they don’t improve traffic flow, they don’t improve urban planning. They’re a direct replacement for individual cars, but now rent-forever as opposed to owning or leasing ourselves. The whole concept is just to remove another strata of ownership and funnel more money to Capital and away from Governments, which I guess is the whole point if you genuinely don’t like governments for some reason. The healthier option for the masses is expanding mass transit networks, not luxe taxis. Light rail is infinitely more efficient and safer than individual vehicles, be they owner-operated or self-driving. It moves more people, further, faster, and cheaper than any potential self-driving automobile. When you include the whole of networks - ferries, bus routes, commuter rail - they’re the single most effective solution to everything self-driving car proponents claim their products can do, if only they had another round of funding. I’m not saying we should stop investing in the technology, mind. I just think it’s a better use of our limited resources to invest in improving, expanding, and modernizing mass transit than to build armies of privately-owned taxis, self-driving or otherwise.
- triceratops 2y ago
  > self-driving taxis...don’t alleviate congestion Not by themselves. But combine them with a congestion tax, unless the taxi is full, and you've got an infinitely adaptable, cheap, and scalable bus network.
- xnx 2y ago
  That's a lot of unsupported claims. I'm not familiar with the situation worldwide, but in the US metropolitan transit agencies are primarily a tool to funnel public money to private construction firms and unions. Sometimes this money-suck happens at the rate of $3.5 billion/mile: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/28/nyregion/new-york-subway-construction-costs.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/28/nyregion/new-york-subway-... I like public transit, and I Know he public can get a lot more for its money if we leave behind our old thinking.
cozzyd 2y ago
A point to point taxi has low capacity and is deadheading empty half the time. Many buses on more fixed routes (possibly with flexible small deviations) is going to be much more efficient.
- xnx 2y ago
  Seat utilization (i.e. cost per passenger mile) is a good way to think about things. Small shuttles are almost certainly a win over large buses. Definitely worth running the simulations to see if small (6 passenger) vehicles are even better.
  - cozzyd 2y ago
    I don't know, standing room only buses is common place for me ..

by gedy 2y ago

Yeah, I mean using this tech for a fleet of self driving, point-to-point taxis as public transit makes sense to me. A bus on the usual fixed routes? Not really.

stego-tech 2y ago

Because point-to-point self-driving taxis are a fool’s errand. They don’t alleviate congestion, they don’t improve traffic flow, they don’t improve urban planning. They’re a direct replacement for individual cars, but now rent-forever as opposed to owning or leasing ourselves. The whole concept is just to remove another strata of ownership and funnel more money to Capital and away from Governments, which I guess is the whole point if you genuinely don’t like governments for some reason. The healthier option for the masses is expanding mass transit networks, not luxe taxis. Light rail is infinitely more efficient and safer than individual vehicles, be they owner-operated or self-driving. It moves more people, further, faster, and cheaper than any potential self-driving automobile. When you include the whole of networks - ferries, bus routes, commuter rail - they’re the single most effective solution to everything self-driving car proponents claim their products can do, if only they had another round of funding. I’m not saying we should stop investing in the technology, mind. I just think it’s a better use of our limited resources to invest in improving, expanding, and modernizing mass transit than to build armies of privately-owned taxis, self-driving or otherwise.

triceratops 2y ago
> self-driving taxis...don’t alleviate congestion Not by themselves. But combine them with a congestion tax, unless the taxi is full, and you've got an infinitely adaptable, cheap, and scalable bus network.
xnx 2y ago
That's a lot of unsupported claims. I'm not familiar with the situation worldwide, but in the US metropolitan transit agencies are primarily a tool to funnel public money to private construction firms and unions. Sometimes this money-suck happens at the rate of $3.5 billion/mile: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/28/nyregion/new-york-subway-construction-costs.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/28/nyregion/new-york-subway-... I like public transit, and I Know he public can get a lot more for its money if we leave behind our old thinking.

cozzyd 2y ago

A point to point taxi has low capacity and is deadheading empty half the time. Many buses on more fixed routes (possibly with flexible small deviations) is going to be much more efficient.

xnx 2y ago
Seat utilization (i.e. cost per passenger mile) is a good way to think about things. Small shuttles are almost certainly a win over large buses. Definitely worth running the simulations to see if small (6 passenger) vehicles are even better.
- cozzyd 2y ago
  I don't know, standing room only buses is common place for me ..