Uber was supposed to help traffic. It didn’t. Robotaxis will be even worse
1–10 of 134 posts
Re: Uber was supposed to help traffic. It didn’t. Robotaxis will be even worse
#2One word: deadheading.
Any time you share a vehicle in time but not in space (only one rider per trip) you've increased congestion due to the trip out to fetch the person. Net loss every time.
Re: Uber was supposed to help traffic. It didn’t. Robotaxis will be even worse
#3One word: deadheading. Any time you share a vehicle in time but not in space (only one rider per trip) you've increased congestion due to the trip out to fetch the person. Net loss every time.
Wow, that’s a great point I hadn’t considered before. Thanks!
Re: Uber was supposed to help traffic. It didn’t. Robotaxis will be even worse
#4One word: deadheading. Any time you share a vehicle in time but not in space (only one rider per trip) you've increased congestion due to the trip out to fetch the person. Net loss every time.
If we define deadheading as any segment on a route a transit vehicle is empty (which is at odds with the definition for deadheading from my flight attendant friends, and my friends who are fans of the greatful dead), and eliminate that, a lot of bus lines are going to become very short, especially late at night.
Re: Uber was supposed to help traffic. It didn’t. Robotaxis will be even worse
#5Wasn’t the point of taxi medallions to limit traffic in the first place?
Re: Uber was supposed to help traffic. It didn’t. Robotaxis will be even worse
#6One word: deadheading. Any time you share a vehicle in time but not in space (only one rider per trip) you've increased congestion due to the trip out to fetch the person. Net loss every time.
Yeah nightmare scenario: everyone owns a robotic car, no one wants to pay for traffic. Car drives to work, then you send it home rather than pay for parking, and then summon car to pickup from work. So basically dual direction rush hour that stretches for twice as many hours.
Re: Uber was supposed to help traffic. It didn’t. Robotaxis will be even worse
#7One word: deadheading. Any time you share a vehicle in time but not in space (only one rider per trip) you've increased congestion due to the trip out to fetch the person. Net loss every time.
If we define deadheading as any segment on a route a transit vehicle is empty (which is at odds with the definition for deadheading from my flight attendant friends, and my friends who are fans of the greatful dead), and eliminate that, a lot of bus lines are going to become very short, especially late at night.
[deleted]
Re: Uber was supposed to help traffic. It didn’t. Robotaxis will be even worse
#8[dead]
Re: Uber was supposed to help traffic. It didn’t. Robotaxis will be even worse
#9If robo taxies could be limited to running to and from transit hubs, they could provide a huge benefit in providing last mile service. I would love to call a taxi to get from the light rail station home (which is a 17 minute car ride or a 40 minute bus ride + 10 minute walk), I wouldn't bother just getting an Uber directly home from the airport anymore (taking lightrail and transferring to bus doesn't make sense).
Re: Uber was supposed to help traffic. It didn’t. Robotaxis will be even worse
#10Uber was supposed to make hailing a vehicle easier. It succeeded at that. Congestion is a matter for traffic engineers and congestion pricing.