4 ms·

That point often seems to be left completely out of the discussion about self-driving cars. Is making a 9x14' box an easier and more appealing mode of transport

• JulianMorrison 14y ago
  Robo-cars in taxi mode won't stop, they'll go from one job to the next, and they won't park except at times of low demand. Unlike drive-it-yourself cars, they won't eat up urban space for parking lots, and the total car fleet will be much smaller because the allocation only has to be "one per currently travelling commuter", more or less, rather than "one per human".
  • bruceboughton 14y ago
    So just like taxis, then?
    • masklinn 14y ago
      With no driver and a quarter the size or less for smaller (1-seat) units.
      • MichaelApproved 14y ago
        And instead of underground trains, there could be underground highways that automatic vehicles use.
• tadfisher 14y ago
  This is the harm-reduction debate. For example, Swedish snus and electronic cigarettes are much less harmful than smoking, but the argument goes that quitting nicotine altogether is less harmful than anything. Yet people still smoke and use nicotine, so switching the stalwarts over to less-harmful methods of nicotine consumption would save lots of lives and money. Likewise, it may not be possible in the short term to convince everyone to stop driving cars. Self-driving cars won't fix the long-term problem of efficient transportation, urban sprawl, or emissions, but they can reduce its harm by efficiently providing car-like service to the public.