Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 556 posts

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#191

Post by javagram »

bogle wrote: post #187
redwood wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That may be happening in Europe but for 95% of Americans it's sadly a pipedream.

What is stopping American cities from changing their infrastructure investment from automobiles to micromobility? Is there one, big, standout reason that could be addressed? It's a change that takes decades and it's fighting against incumbents with deep pockets but it could be done.

Democracy.

Other than Manhattan, everywhere else a majority of residents own cars (Even in Manhattan I think it’s like 40% or something own a car). Moreover, the last 70 years of migration have led to a common pattern of people living in the suburbs and commuting via car to their workplace - replacing that with micromobility feels like a threat to their way of life and they will fight it vigorously.

What we actually see happen is even small tweaks like the 14th street bus lane in NYC get tied up in court and fought via democratic processes, when they do succeed it’s after a lot of effort.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#192

Post by Phenomenit »

ossworkerrights wrote: post #149
bogle wrote: post #133

If we expect driverless cars to be further delayed and we continue building our cities to encourage micromobility (bikes, electric scooters, segregated lanes, car free streets, etc.) then at which point does the value of the driverless car become moot because we no longer drive? Does this sound unlikely? Consider European cities like Copenhagen and Amsterdam which have encouraged cycling over the last two decades and…

But why do we even need to cluster in massive cities, when today’s technologies allow for remote work for pretty much any non physical type of work? Accountants, developers, designers, architects, customer support, and so on can all be done remotely. That would reduce both the need to drive and to cram people in overcrowded public transport options.

Gravity is still an important aspect of an economy. People congregate near food sources(jobs). Companies congregate close to the other services they need because it costs less.

as long as our food is on one specific location so will we.

If the trend of subsistence farming because more than that we might see a shift in urban areas.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#193

Post by ElFitz »

ossworkerrights wrote: post #149
bogle wrote: post #133

If we expect driverless cars to be further delayed and we continue building our cities to encourage micromobility (bikes, electric scooters, segregated lanes, car free streets, etc.) then at which point does the value of the driverless car become moot because we no longer drive? Does this sound unlikely? Consider European cities like Copenhagen and Amsterdam which have encouraged cycling over the last two decades and…

But why do we even need to cluster in massive cities, when today’s technologies allow for remote work for pretty much any non physical type of work? Accountants, developers, designers, architects, customer support, and so on can all be done remotely. That would reduce both the need to drive and to cram people in overcrowded public transport options.

It's not just a matter of work. Good luck finding my local theater's shows in Greenfields, nowhere, USA.

Sure I can work from anywhere, but businesses (especially leisure) tend to concentrate where people concentrate.

Just like when I went trekking. I asked our guide once, _where do we have to go for the trail to be less crowded?_

He named a few places. Then mentioned there were no stairs on the slopes of the mountains he just named. No hot water for showers in the lodges on the way. Much fewer places to stay to eat or sleep. And not as much choice on the menu.

Wether it's around the Annapurna or in the US, businesses and services develop and concentrate where there they can find more customers. People go where they can find the products, services and experiences they long for, and the people they care about.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#194

Post by ralfd »

theieindjri wrote: post #38
crocal wrote: post #8

The article misses an important point. It’s not only a problem of technology, it’s also a problem of risk acceptance. While we accept to be killed by our own mistakes at the wheel, society (we) will not accept that a machine makes the same, even if the failure rate is on average /better/. This is the fundamental issue Elon Musk has. The driverless bar for safety is way higher than very clever driver assistance or eve…

I don't understand why so many otherwise smart people fell for FSD hype. I'm not talking about the many con artists - I'm talking about the tech-savvy people who genuinely bought into FSD hype. How is it not obvious that FSD most likely requires artificial general intelligence and is, thus, probably somewhere between "many decades away" and "humans will never achieve it"?

> How is it not obvious that FSD most likely requires artificial general intelligence

Waymo car fully self driving three days ago:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_1YLHW65M8

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#195

Post by jplayer01 »

w0utert wrote: post #188
jplayer01 wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the whole point of driverless cars is at some point, you can deploy car sharing services that largely replace private car ownership/usage. At least, that's what I'd hope, because it's an insane waste of space and resources that the vast majority of cars you see on the road only transport a single person around. I mean, I get that people don't care about their environmental impact, but at some point we're goin…

Why do you think people using a driverless car service would care less about having to share their ride? In theory if people would just carpool much more right now, the number of cars on the road would go down a lot, and they could divide the costs. But somehow they don't. I don't see why people who don't consider carpooling right now would order a driverless car that needs to pick up some other people before going w…

Convenience. Habit. Cultural pressure. Regulatory changes. Etc.

It isn't as simple as "People don't do it now, why would they do it in the future?" There are many ways to make automated car sharing far more attractive to people than car pooling ever could.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#196

Post by mantap »

ossworkerrights wrote: post #149
bogle wrote: post #133

If we expect driverless cars to be further delayed and we continue building our cities to encourage micromobility (bikes, electric scooters, segregated lanes, car free streets, etc.) then at which point does the value of the driverless car become moot because we no longer drive? Does this sound unlikely? Consider European cities like Copenhagen and Amsterdam which have encouraged cycling over the last two decades and…

But why do we even need to cluster in massive cities, when today’s technologies allow for remote work for pretty much any non physical type of work? Accountants, developers, designers, architects, customer support, and so on can all be done remotely. That would reduce both the need to drive and to cram people in overcrowded public transport options.

Many people like living in cities. There are many dozens of restaurants within walking distance of my home and quite literally thousands if I hop on the tube. How would my life be enriched if I lived in suburbia?

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#197

Post by larzang »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #51
theieindjri wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why so many otherwise smart people fell for FSD hype. I'm not talking about the many con artists - I'm talking about the tech-savvy people who genuinely bought into FSD hype. How is it not obvious that FSD most likely requires artificial general intelligence and is, thus, probably somewhere between "many decades away" and "humans will never achieve it"?

If I had to have an opinion, this would be it. I don't see why self-driving vehicles can't be dependant on additional self-driving-vehicle-related-signage or sensors embedded in / around / near roads, etc etc. Humans are fairly dependant on additional signage, maps, and navigation tools (Google / Apple Maps).

And where is this going to come from? Our public infrastructure is crumbling after decades of insufficient spending and maintenance as it is. It will take a significant social shift to reverse this trend and stop robbing the future to support short-term political agendas of neoliberal austerity and privatization that merely enrich the rich further.

If we can accomplish such a shift, there are already much more worthy ends to put the money and political will towards: increased public transportation, rebuilding of streets to safely support non-vehicle traffic, public ev infrastructure, etc. Spending massive amounts to subsidize the few rich who could afford autonomous cars would just be further regressive policy.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#198

Post by davidgould »

sliken wrote: post #100
mr__y wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

while I generally agree with your point, that new cars with great braking, enhanced safety and in perfect technical conditions are safer than average, I'm not entirely convinced if BMW is the right make for this kind of examples edit: typo

Heh, ok, pick any luxury car priced similarly to the Tesla.

It's odd that so many of the comments on the self driving threads make this assumption that drivers of expensive cars are safer than drivers of inexpensive cars. It is just part of the classist bias that attaches virtue to wealth? Or is there some data that suggests that a Mercedes driver is a better driver than a Kia driver?

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#199

Post by ArnoVW »

arethuza wrote: post #189
300bps wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't need to drive why would you buy a driverless car? I don’t anticipate many people will ever buy a driverless car. The whole concept of buying a car is kind of ridiculous. You pay for it then you continue paying for registration, insurance, maintenance, park, etc all while it sits idle 90% of the time. Driverless cars allow you to be picked up at your front door and dropped off exactly at the spot wherever…

A lot of those benefits can be had from taxis - and yet people still buy their own cars.

Taxis are expensive because they require a human to drive them. Hence the reason the SDC could change that dynamic. A shared car that does not require an expensive human to drive it.

Another model are shared cars, like dockless scooters and bikes. They are reasonably popular in the Netherlands for example. But they still require quite a bit of planning to ensure the car is available, and they are not always "in front of your door". Also you need to rent it for the entire time that you're away.

Irrespective, SDC will take some time. Like NLP, they work will within a constrained problem domain, but don't really generalise.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#200

Post by bluGill »

bogle wrote: post #133

If we expect driverless cars to be further delayed and we continue building our cities to encourage micromobility (bikes, electric scooters, segregated lanes, car free streets, etc.) then at which point does the value of the driverless car become moot because we no longer drive? Does this sound unlikely? Consider European cities like Copenhagen and Amsterdam which have encouraged cycling over the last two decades and…

Even in the inner city there are times when a car beats everything else. Or more likely a truck. The store you get groceries from gets deliveries every day, and they probably should have a special waiver to drive on that car free street to get the truck to their back door (I've seen areas in Germany where the old part of town was effectively car free except delivery trucks)

Most people will not need to drive very often, so they would not buy a car at all. However everybody has situations where driving of some sort is the best option.

Post reply on HN