New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior • Hacker News Board

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#341

Post by FullMtlAlcoholc » Mon, Oct 16, 2017, 1:17 AM UTC

StudentStuff wrote: post #267

c3534l wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Congestion is certainly a negative externality. At the extreme, traffic can increase to the point where roads can no longer function to facilitate the movement of cars - constant traffic jams and decreased speed relative to walking or biking. Additionally, driving in traffic is unpleasant, increases accidents, reduces the desirability of living in the surrounding area, is smelly and noisy to be around, and increases…

Well, if we were actually reasonable about mass transit in the US, you wouldn't see cities like LA giving priority to cars over light rail (with poor excuses like "cars can only wait 50 seconds at an intersection"). Quite a bit of LA could also do with dedicated HOT lanes for buses, bikers and those accessing local destinations (eg: within 4 blocks), combined with signal priority for buses you could easily see a bus…

That can certainly have an effect. At the end of the day, a lot of people in LA prefer serene private transport in an environment under their control that runs on their own schedule over public transport. I commuted via bike and public transit for 3 years more or less every day. I work remotely now, but I'd be reluctant to use it regularly even if it was faster and free.

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#342

Post by leereeves » Mon, Oct 16, 2017, 1:19 AM UTC

bmcfeeley wrote: post #321

leereeves wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like a reasonable interpretation of: > In LA, driving drunk was just the way of life, and it was a real problem. Now, I don't know anyone who prefers driving over ridesharing given the option. anyone

That's not how words work. "I don't know everyone who is Japanese" does not mean every person who exists is Japanese.

Obviously the sample "everyone I know" is not representative. Really, there's no reason to ever mention it.

But mentioning it suggests it is representative of something, and if it were a representative sample, 0% of the sample has trait X suggests 0% of the population has trait X.

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#343

Post by Mz » Mon, Oct 16, 2017, 1:19 AM UTC

FullMtlAlcoholc wrote: post #322

dragonwriter wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My interpretation of his comment was that drunk driving was basically required if you wanted to go out and drink. That's a reasonable interpretation, though even so interpreted it's quite wrong. You can go out and drink and never be legally drunk, much less not drive drunk. “Go out and drink” is quite different from “go out and drink heavily and then drive immediately”.

>You can go out and drink and never be legally drunk, much less not drive drunk. That there is a legal threshold (In California anyway) for being drunk while driving is a common misconception. When you get a DUI, two charges are filed against you. One by the DMV and another reviewed by a criminal judge. If there is an accident, you are found at fault, and you have a ~. 06 BAC, the judge/DA will most likely charge you…

I used to process accident claims for a major insurance company. I sometimes had to determine if DUI was a factor.

https://www.dmv.org/ca-california/automotive-law/dui.php

Per California's driving under the influence (DUI) laws, it's illegal to operate a motor vehicle with any of the following blood alcohol concentration (BAC) percentages:

0.08% or higher― 21 years old or older operating a regular passenger vehicle.

0.04% or higher―operating a commercial vehicle.

0.01% or higher―younger than 21 years old.

Also, size matters:

http://www.businessinsider.com/drinks-before-driving-if-bac-...

If the GP is a big guy and has one or two drinks over the course of the evening with friends and then drives home, he may not ever be stopped. He may be less impaired than, say, someone driving while on cold medicine or short of sleep, which is typically not illegal, but can be significantly impairing.

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#344

Post by ekianjo » Mon, Oct 16, 2017, 1:26 AM UTC

netsharc wrote: post #337

ibejoeb wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That all seems like a net positive to me, especially in major urban areas that a very car dependent like Los Angles, Atlanta, Houston... In LA, driving drunk was just the way of life, and it was a real problem. Now, I don't know anyone who prefers driving over ridesharing given the option. Uber Pool makes getting from the east side to the west side faster that public transit for about $10-15, which is less than 1 dri…

They should've done this study in a European city with great public transport which also has Uber, like Munich or Berlin.

"Great public transport" means what exactly? Even in Japan which is widely recognized as one of the countries with excellent public transport, trains and buses stop at night (and not too late either), so if you are going out, and coming back after midnight it's either your car or a very expensive taxi. Is Munich/Berlin any different?

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#345

Post by lukeschlather » Mon, Oct 16, 2017, 1:31 AM UTC

djrogers wrote: post #312

akgerber wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A significant component of this is that your (usually free) parking on both ends of the trip is subsidized by its requirement in local zoning, which increases general costs and subsidizes driving (parking spaces often cost $10,000+ apiece to build, excluding any land cost). The Highway Trust Fund, which pays for interstates, has also been bailed out by general federal funds in recent years, and local roads are usuall…

> parking spaces often cost $10,000+ apiece to build, excluding any land cost I don’t buy that for a second - even in extremely expensive areas like the Bay Area, concrete is less than $20/sq ft poured (ie including all costs), and most parking lots I see around here are blacktop which is even cheaper....

In extremely expensive areas like the Bay Area, parking is usually either elevated or underground. Most of the buildings going up in Seattle spend 3-6 months excavating a parking garage.

If they aren't elevated or underground, the land itself is worth hundreds of dollars per square foot, so even if the actual construction is negligible the parking space is still worth $30,000+ that could be used for other things.

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#346

Post by SilasX » Mon, Oct 16, 2017, 1:43 AM UTC

solidsnack9000 wrote: post #258

c3534l wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The one fifth of trips that wouldn't exist seems like a positive to society in that it is providing a service that is actively making a difference the choices people are making, providing them with value and choice. Additionally, restaurants are happy because they're getting more customers and selling more drinks. The reduction in drunk driving is also good. I'm not sure that justifies the rest of the traffic increas…

> The one fifth of trips that wouldn't exist seems like a positive to society... But it does still mean more traffic.

It may not mean the traffic we actually care about. If vehicle miles increase at 3am, when no road is at capacity, there is virtually no externality or negative impact buses.

If people are mainly using Uber/Lyft for those mid-late evening barhopping trips, then the same logic basically applies -- those aren't the times when roads are near capacity.

It would mainly be a problem if they're using it near rush hours, where it would in fact increase the vehicles/person o on the road.

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#347

Post by matchbok » Mon, Oct 16, 2017, 1:48 AM UTC

fiatjaf wrote: post #328

wpietri wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But I can get Lyft door to door for just $1-2 more than a bus or train. It'll be interesting to see how these prices change when they are no longer subsidized by venture capitalists, contractor drivers, and society at large. And even more interesting once we have decent self-driving technology. That removes the constraint -- the driver -- that makes public transit and mass transit nearly synonymous. The Personal Ra…

> It'll be interesting to see how these prices change when they are no longer subsidized by venture capitalists, contractor drivers, and society at large. You say that without realizing that public transport has been subsidized by the State and "society at large" for a hundred years.

The public benefits to a working transit system are nearly innumerable. The benefits to VC money funding Uber benefits the owners of Uber and exactly nobody else, while we all see more traffic, congestion, pollution, waste, and more.

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#348

Post by ajmurmann » Mon, Oct 16, 2017, 1:52 AM UTC

smsm42 wrote: post #101

justboxing wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> expand routes, increase availability, update their equipment. ... and be faster . The SFMTA in San Francisco , at an average travel speed of 5 miles / hour. Is only slightly faster than brisk walking. Also, from the downtown FiDi out 2 miles in every direction, the Bus has a bus stop at Every block. Yes, every block.

This is a basic contradiction which I am not sure is solvable. If the stops are too far away, you (or somebody for whom walking is harder, like older people, less physically fit people, etc.) won't be able to use it. If stops are too close, getting through them takes a lot of time. I know there is a body of work that tries to find optimal setup for such cases, but I'm not sure it's possible to make everybody happy he…

It's not a contradiction. The buses only go down main roads. But on those roads they stop at every block. I'd be happy to walk three or even four blocks to catch a bus. So the bus could stop every 6-8 blocks on the roads it goes down. Now that those buses are faster we might be able to add additional routes on roads that were previously more than 3-4 blocks from a stop.

Also other countries were able to solve this. It's a uniquely American problem.

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#349

Post by nradov » Mon, Oct 16, 2017, 1:52 AM UTC

smileysteve wrote: post #277

colechristensen wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm regularly bothered by the fact that mass transit is more expensive than driving. Alone it is definitely cheaper disregarding sunk costs (price of car, etc.), it's still cheaper as long as I don't have to have a new car every few years, and if I have passengers mass transit is many times as expensive as driving. Shouldn't it be the opposite? I figure I can take 4 people from Mountain View to San Francisco and back…

Most states estimate the cost per mile of an automobile at above $0.50/mile for business expenses. When gasoline was >$4, that estimate was estimated to be $1/mile. You're also not estimating the liability very well. Likelihood and cost of death or injury of 5 people MV to SF and back added with chances of uninsured drivers leaves most drivers well underinsured. Also, the statistical unlikelihood of having a fully oc…

The current IRS rate is $0.535/mi for deductible business expenses. I'm not aware of any states using a different rate.

Re: New Research on How Ride-Hailing Impacts Travel Behavior

#350

Post by chrischen » Mon, Oct 16, 2017, 1:53 AM UTC

abalone wrote: post #107

tl;dr People use ridesharing mostly to go out to eat and drink (62% of trips). Riders are actually more likely to own cars. They don't want to drive when they're going out because they don't want to deal with parking or drive drunk. They don't ride the bus because it's too slow, unreliable or unavailable. If ridesharing didn't exist, two fifths of the time they'd walk, bike or use public transit instead, and a fifth…

Recently one of my daily routes actually takes longer by lyft line than by public transit, if the lyft line has two intermediate pickups and drops. I feel like once it reaches peak car pooling sustainable fiscal efficiency it no longer becomes superior or conpetitive against public transit.