Why driverless cars may mean jams tomorrow
economist.com
Why driverless cars may mean jams tomorrow
1–10 of 77 posts
Re: Why driverless cars may mean jams tomorrow
#2This title is confusing. The actual title is more approachable - Why driverless cars may mean jams tomorrow
Still I am confused by articles logic - Why would driveless car be any better than the current ownership model? The logic presented is - AIs that can pilot cars more closely together will boost road capacity. But using article's logic on people movement - it might entice people who actually don't drive due to various reason to actually buy a car. The increased number of cars might lead to the said jam.
One of my controversial opinion is that going forward governments might be tempted to label ride sharing companies as basic necessities, just like internet, to try and improve transportation.
Re: Why driverless cars may mean jams tomorrow
#3This title is confusing. The actual title is more approachable - Why driverless cars may mean jams tomorrow Still I am confused by articles logic - Why would driveless car be any better than the current ownership model? The logic presented is - AIs that can pilot cars more closely together will boost road capacity . But using article's logic on people movement - it might entice people who actually don't drive due to…
> This title is confusing. The actual title is more approachable - Why driverless cars may mean jams tomorrow
Agreed, I expected an article about the intricacies of the fruit preserve industry.
Re: Why driverless cars may mean jams tomorrow
#4This title is confusing. The actual title is more approachable - Why driverless cars may mean jams tomorrow Still I am confused by articles logic - Why would driveless car be any better than the current ownership model? The logic presented is - AIs that can pilot cars more closely together will boost road capacity . But using article's logic on people movement - it might entice people who actually don't drive due to…
> This title is confusing
The Economist is famous for using puns in its headlines, and this is a play on a well-known expression (that is itself a pun):
Re: Why driverless cars may mean jams tomorrow
#5No, the way it will work is that roads will have "surge pricing". You'll bid on road space before you leave, and don't get to leave until there's road space for you.
US airport landing slots work like that now. Commercial flights don't take off for congested destinations until they've booked a landing slot. This eliminated circling the destination waiting for a landing slot.
Re: Why driverless cars may mean jams tomorrow
#6No, the way it will work is that roads will have "surge pricing". You'll bid on road space before you leave, and don't get to leave until there's road space for you. US airport landing slots work like that now. Commercial flights don't take off for congested destinations until they've booked a landing slot. This eliminated circling the destination waiting for a landing slot.
Or you could leave whenever you like, and there's an automated toll on every road that adjusts based on time of day and/or current traffic.
Re: Why driverless cars may mean jams tomorrow
#7This title is confusing. The actual title is more approachable - Why driverless cars may mean jams tomorrow Still I am confused by articles logic - Why would driveless car be any better than the current ownership model? The logic presented is - AIs that can pilot cars more closely together will boost road capacity . But using article's logic on people movement - it might entice people who actually don't drive due to…
I also don't follow that argument. IMHO accidents and bad swarm behavior (people following too closely, switching lanes too often, accelerating and braking too much) lead to traffic jams. If we can get that improved our roads could take twice the cars.
Re: Why driverless cars may mean jams tomorrow
#8This article seems to offer a somewhat limited vision. Personal, driverless cars may mean as many jams as today. What about "ride-sharing" driverless systems, where many people share the same car/minivan in an automated fashion, reducing the number of vehicles on the road and the need for parking? That would make, IMHO, the best compromise between mass transit (effective, but inflexible to people needs) and personal transit (ineffective, but flexible).
Re: Why driverless cars may mean jams tomorrow
#9No, the way it will work is that roads will have "surge pricing". You'll bid on road space before you leave, and don't get to leave until there's road space for you. US airport landing slots work like that now. Commercial flights don't take off for congested destinations until they've booked a landing slot. This eliminated circling the destination waiting for a landing slot.
California is/was? running a pilot program to charge car owners on miles driven instead of gas taxes. Maybe another option is additional "surge" charges to cover this as well.
http://www.dot.ca.gov/road_charge/resources/index.html
Re: Why driverless cars may mean jams tomorrow
#10This article seems to offer a somewhat limited vision. Personal, driverless cars may mean as many jams as today. What about "ride-sharing" driverless systems, where many people share the same car/minivan in an automated fashion, reducing the number of vehicles on the road and the need for parking? That would make, IMHO, the best compromise between mass transit (effective, but inflexible to people needs) and personal…
[deleted]