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

Waymo in Dallas

waymo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

581–590 of 752 posts

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#581

Post by bluGill »

DiscourseFan wrote: post #419
pibaker wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A network of fully autonomous electric self-driving cars on a developed roadway can only be superseded in efficiency by high speed rail [citation needed] Not an expert but it seems trivial to me that a road full of cars each carrying one or two passengers will take up a lot more space than trains or buses carrying the same number of people.

Ok but an autonomous bus, or autonomous vehicles designed to fit different numbers of people, would not be better than a one size fits all bus?

The one size fits all bus would be better. A tiny car cannot share rides without adding big delays to the person already on it. That means you cannot count on getting there on time with a shared ride. The bus has defined delays so you can predict when you will get there and this arrive on time.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#582

Post by lkbm »

stratom wrote: post #460
xnx wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because it's not a train doesn't mean a self-driving car system isn't public transport. Free your mind.

Definition of public transport: Cambridge Dictionary (UK): "A system of vehicles such as buses and trains that operate at regular times on fixed routes and are used by the public." Collins Dictionary: "A system of buses, trains, etc., running on fixed routes, on which the public may travel."

Quoting a dictionary won't get you very far with real people. Those are obviously wrong in that they're overly prescriptive and tied to what was common when they were written. The dictionary is trying to give you an idea of what most public transit looks like. It's not strictly reflective of reality or of actual usage.

Is the city and county provided point-to-point transit for disabled people[0] not "public transit"? Is Line 0[1] not public transit? Most people say yes; the dictionary should be updated to reflect actual usage, not the other way around.

[0] https://www.mta.info/accessibility/access-a-ride

[1] https://fairtiq.com/en/blog/line-zero-the-public-transport-e...

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#583

Post by bluGill »

jdxcode wrote: post #429
pibaker wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US is ten times more dense than Australia. And yet Australian cities tend to have comparable if not better transit than similarly sized American cities. The overall population density of a country is largely irrelevant in this discussion because 99% of day to day travels are contained within the same metro areas.

90% of australians live in 0.22% of the country's land

Whole the us has different numbers, but the same point applies. Most of the people in the US live in dense enough areas. The Mid west has similar size and population as France for example.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#584

Post by bluGill »

servo_sausage wrote: post #540
master-lincoln wrote: post #539

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disagree because of the amount of space wasted for parking

What? Autonomous cars can park wherever...

Only by taking up more road space going to a parking lot. And more energy in those travels - that energy is at best 50% fossil fuels.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#585

Post by Grombobulous »

infecto wrote: post #572
Grombobulous wrote: post #427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With respect to you as a person and your ideas presented, this is one of the most car-brained posts I've ever read. > it's way more efficient than building $100 billion in transit that will take 200 years to build. What is efficient about a $13 highway widening project in Houston or the $24 billion (inflation-adjusted) and 15 years it cost to bury a highway in Boston? (It's not even much of a new highway, it's just u…

If you have to say “with respect” don’t say it at all. You can share your ideas without calling names. A bus would simply never work. Busses, trains and other modes of group transport or hard or near impossible to get right in a sprawling suburban metro. It would be amazing if it was possible but folks are going to work in so many directions (there is not a single workplace hub) and after work they may be going to an…

Then why does public transit work in other countries with suburbs?

Obligatory repost of this video about small towns and cities in the Netherlands being easily accessible by public transit and cycling:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=ztpcWUqVpIg

I will also point out that a large proportion of suburbs in the US are comparatively brand new developments. While we might not be able to retrofit existing developments, fast-growing suburban locations like those in Texas can change course right now and decide to build in a way that’s transit-oriented.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#586

Post by ragazzina »

weatherlite wrote: post #514
ragazzina wrote: post #509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The upside is cheaper mobility for everyone Why should Google leave money on the table? They will raise the price until it's just below what people are already paying.

Not an expert but in general that's usually not how tech works. It generally gets commodified and cheaper : TVs, mobile phones, computers etc etc. They're either becoming cheaper or you get a way better product for the same price (think of today's TVs that make the 80s tvs look like something from the middle ages). Yes Google in the initial decade will possibly have a big head start but in the end Tesla and a bunch o…

>not how tech works. It generally gets commodified and cheaper: TVs

Hardware gets commodified and cheaper, not services usually. Do you pay less for cable tv now compared to 20 years ago?

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#587

Post by bluGill »

infecto wrote: post #277
SoftTalker wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd go further and say that in most smaller cities that try to run a bus service but just don't have the ridership to support adequate service they would be better off just subsidizing Ubers or Waymos or whatever is available. Pare down the bus service to only the heavily used routes and run them way more often.

100%. Most bus routes are terribly expensive to run, multiple drivers, benefits and then the physical equipment. It would be interesting if you could work out a subsidy program for low income riders.

A route is expensive to run, but there is no reason you cannot automate a bus driver just like a car driver.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#588

Post by irowe »

1123581321 wrote: post #566
airza wrote: post #526

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The finances of these metros rarely incorporate road costs; their accounting does not require them to incorporate the future liability for infrastructure maintenance and so everything looks good until they need to redo the roads.

What leads you to say that? Capex is typically budgeted.

If it's anything like my municipality, all that stuff is balanced in the budget by issuing bonds. My accounting knowledge is weak, but as I understand it, even though a city's credit rating and the prospective interest on its bonds are a feedback mechanism to help moderate the spending, it's still tempting for a city to overbuild without a plan to fund the bonds plus the incurred cost ongoing maintenance without ending up with too much debt.

Re: Waymo in Dallas

#590

Post by bluGill »

SoftTalker wrote: post #266
eagleinparadise wrote: post #232

As someone who works in commercial real estate, involved in about $300M of housing development, some of it affordable, i will say without any doubt that driverless cars are a very effective affordable housing policy that is not being considered or discussed by anyone. Any public dollar that gets contributed to housing, basically adds a 50% cost factor and assume whatever it is used for will take 2-3x as long to deliv…

I'd go further and say that in most smaller cities that try to run a bus service but just don't have the ridership to support adequate service they would be better off just subsidizing Ubers or Waymos or whatever is available. Pare down the bus service to only the heavily used routes and run them way more often.

Most share cities could get adequate ridership just by expanding service. That is more service would be more riders than they are getting. However they need a lot more service to reach this topping point to where people will choose to give up their car, and you can't get support for those costs until you already have had that level of service for five years.
Post reply on HN