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

Nevada approves regulations for self-driving cars

physorg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 140 posts

Re: Nevada approves regulations for self-driving cars

#71

Post by lazerwalker »

finnw wrote: post #52
JeffL wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or if everyone moves towards self-driving taxi's, then the car takes you to work, then takes someone from near there somewhere else, etc, so you're really talking not much more extra driving, but saving tons on building fewer cars, fewer parking lots, and economies of scales for buying gas and maintaining the cars.

That won't help. Everyone in the area will likely be travelling to work around the same time.

A setup like this should theoretically be able to optimize carpooling so as to minimize that. A smart automated system should be able to figure out how to efficiently cram 3-5 people into every car by optimizing routes.

Of course, in actuality there would be plenty of people who would demand their own private car out of principle.

Re: Nevada approves regulations for self-driving cars

#72

Post by jfoutz »

xp84 wrote: post #54
jfoutz wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No way it's public. I can imagine apartment buildings having a car or two for use like a gym or laundry. Or, perhaps a subscription service, superzipcar or something like that.

Why "no way"? I don't have any problem with your suggested models either, but see no reason why public car services couldn't coexist.

short version, politics & tragedy of the commons.

Anything is possible, I just can't imagine a (US) municipality that's able to implement an entirely new public service. IIRC, community wi-fi keeps getting sued by companies that want to make money. First, none can afford it. Second the US, IMHO, is really hostile toward any sort of government service.

Even if those were non-issues, you still have to solve the problem of vandalism. People behave like grownups when other people are watching (pretty much). The bus or subway are good examples. Alone, in a car, i think it's much tougher to keep people well behaved. there have been various community bicycle programs that suffer from people beating the hell out of the bikes, or just stealing them.

These are perhaps mutable problems in small towns, or outside of the US.

Re: Nevada approves regulations for self-driving cars

#73

Post by rdouble »

gcb wrote: post #69
draggnar wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It could eliminate the need for having a car altogether. Hello zipcar

zip car here in LA is way more expensive than owing an old luxury car AND paying dealership prices on maintenance. or renting a car every other day. I paid 1/8 of zip car's prices when i used enterprise rentals for two months

Zip Car works best in SF, there are cars everywhere, the city is 2nd densest in the country but still a pain to do most errands without a car, cabs suck, and the price is right. Boston is similar, but I have not used ZipCar there.

In NYC it's at least $2/hr more expensive. Cabs become competitive, and there are tons of cabs. There are many more people but not as many cars as SF, so it's harder to get a car. It's mostly good for moving apartments without dealing with U-Haul, going to IKEA/Fairway in Red Hook or picking up craigslist stuff.

I found in LA, the zip cars were so spread out, I first had to figure out how to get someone to drive me 15 minutes to the car.

Re: Nevada approves regulations for self-driving cars

#74

Post by inconditus »

christkv wrote: post #62

The question of the self-driving car is much more complicated I think than the benefit it will bring. The consequences to the labor market will be interesting to say the least. Just imagine. No taxi drivers No UPS delivery truck drivers (automated delivery anyone) No truckers Less cars produced, less people building cars. Less doctors, hospitals etc due to less accidents. I don't remember who said that we are enterin…

Is this a serious argument? One could say the same thing about:

1) The advent of modern gardening and genetically modified crops. With increased efficiency, where will the extra farmers go?

2) The advent of computers. What will happen to books? The tree cutters? The people who ship the trees to the lumber plant?

I could go on and on about ANY technological advance in the last 200 years. I don't see how cars are any different that will bring "marxism or communism".

Re: Nevada approves regulations for self-driving cars

#75

Post by [deleted] »

geogra4 wrote: post #58
Selvik wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But why did people leave cities to begin with? Street crime was an important factor.

It's a complex question, but I think the main reason was just for child-rearing space. Crime wasn't an issue when the first suburbs exploded in the 50s. With fewer people having children I think that's less of an issue.

[deleted]

Re: Nevada approves regulations for self-driving cars

#76

Post by ChrisNorstrom »

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #10

I'm very excited to here this because it solves the regulatory chicken and egg. Nevada gets a bump for being first (if things go well) and other municipalities can point to Nevada to craft their own regulations. Kudos to Nevada on this one.

This makes me want to visit Las Vegas for this reason alone. I would love to go to Vegas and for the first time in my life ride in a driverless car, convertable, top down, and enjoy the view, take pictures, and relax no matter what the traffic is like.

I can see this being a MASSIVE boost to tourist cities.

Re: Nevada approves regulations for self-driving cars

#78

Post by gcb »

rdouble wrote: post #73
gcb wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

zip car here in LA is way more expensive than owing an old luxury car AND paying dealership prices on maintenance. or renting a car every other day. I paid 1/8 of zip car's prices when i used enterprise rentals for two months

Zip Car works best in SF, there are cars everywhere, the city is 2nd densest in the country but still a pain to do most errands without a car, cabs suck, and the price is right. Boston is similar, but I have not used ZipCar there. In NYC it's at least $2/hr more expensive. Cabs become competitive, and there are tons of cabs. There are many more people but not as many cars as SF, so it's harder to get a car. It's most…

exactly what i was saying :)

to go the nearest market here you already spent mileage enough to get the rental for the day with unlimited miles.

and there's more car rental places than zip cars.

Re: Nevada approves regulations for self-driving cars

#79

Post by decadentcactus »

fragsworth wrote: post #32
huherto wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My guess is that we will have a very efficient Taxi system. Using a Smart Phone you will be able to request a Taxi where ever you are; it will already know your favorite locations; your favorite music; it will automatically charge you; we will not need so much parking space.

Yes, but will it automatically clean up the mess left by the scumbags who were inevitably in the car before you?

As well as being linked to the person before you (for fines or something), I imagine you'd be able to send for another car, saying this one is too dirty etc. At which point it would be routed back to a facility of some sort.

Re: Nevada approves regulations for self-driving cars

#80

Post by analyst74 »

inconditus wrote: post #74
christkv wrote: post #62

The question of the self-driving car is much more complicated I think than the benefit it will bring. The consequences to the labor market will be interesting to say the least. Just imagine. No taxi drivers No UPS delivery truck drivers (automated delivery anyone) No truckers Less cars produced, less people building cars. Less doctors, hospitals etc due to less accidents. I don't remember who said that we are enterin…

Is this a serious argument? One could say the same thing about: 1) The advent of modern gardening and genetically modified crops. With increased efficiency, where will the extra farmers go? 2) The advent of computers. What will happen to books? The tree cutters? The people who ship the trees to the lumber plant? I could go on and on about ANY technological advance in the last 200 years. I don't see how cars are any d…

I have similar feeling. Heck, invention of farming have caused many the hunters and gatherers to lose their jobs!

I can't believe how "taking away jobs" sort of argument against technological advancement keeps showing up over and over, despite being refuted every time.

Post reply on HN