Driverless robotaxi fleet paralyzed for hours in San Francisco

Post by vasilipupkin » Fri, Jul 01, 2022, 1:45 PM UTC

mmustapic wrote: post #328

walleeee wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope we continue to wise up If a core goal is really to make thoroughfares safer and reduce traveler injuries/fatalities, we seem to be ignoring or discounting some pretty obvious options, like minimizing car traffic This vision where we all get around in low-passenger-count autonomous robot cages on existing roadways is just one possible future but we seem to fixate on it. At the end of the day the car is a tool b…

Completely agree, there are lots of things that can be done to reduce car related fatalities, like reducing car usage, lowering the maximum speed, designing better roads (that encourage lower speeds), improve road signage, more stoplights, better pedestrian crossing and protection, reducing distances between useful places. In parts of the city I live in it has become very uncomfortable to drive a car, there are just…

Post by brimwats » Fri, Jul 01, 2022, 1:51 PM UTC

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #422

ghusbands wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None or few of those options are particularly accessible (EDIT: for people who cannot walk/cycle long distances). Public transportation often is quite inaccessible while still claiming to be accessible (like the London Underground and the New York Subway). Central management of driverless cars could solve the problem in a more inclusive fashion and isn't just more of the same idea. We should still reduce the size of…

>> None or few of those options are particularly accessible. At the moment, neither are self-driving cars sufficiently capable to replace human drivers. We're chasing a future tech dream when we already have technology that can solve the problems we are facing right now. Edit: What do you mean by "accessible"? The London underground and generally public transport in the UK works very well. Speaking after having lived…

Post by dogman144 » Fri, Jul 01, 2022, 1:59 PM UTC

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #388

I am just wondering how many people have to die before it finally dawns on on us that the current approach is idiotic. The supposed smart cars can't even talk to each-other directly 'without internet' to warn of a car pileup! They can't report to city traffic control about their condition. We should be innovating in infrastructure instead - create standardised computer readable infrared road markings, equip each traf…

Post by carbadtraingood » Fri, Jul 01, 2022, 2:02 PM UTC

bergenty wrote: post #321

carbadtraingood wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rails are too restrictive for real life? I'm not sure what you are trying to say here... Rails are widely used for real life around the globe. In many, many places rails significantly out perform cars to the point that people choose not to own cars.

Yes point A to B on extremely selective routes or if you only want to go to/between towns/cities your whole life.

Post by yakubin » Fri, Jul 01, 2022, 2:06 PM UTC

planb wrote: post #341

rob_c wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Harsh reply for a perfectly valid argument. I'm all for pushing public transport, but in most places of the world it is still more convenient to drive a car for 20 minutes than to walk 5 minutes, jump in a bus for 5 minutes, wait for 10 minutes at a station, jump in a train for 15 minutes, walk 5 minutes, even if you have to drive yourself. And remember we were talking about self-driving cars here.