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

Uber was supposed to help traffic. It didn’t. Robotaxis will be even worse

sfchronicle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 134 posts

Re: Uber was supposed to help traffic. It didn’t. Robotaxis will be even worse

#111

Post by jprete »

mortureb wrote: post #89
jprete wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are the kinds of optimizations that work very well in theory and are an absolute nightmare in practice. You're talking about a system where one kid running into the road could cause a chain collision of dozens of cars that were counting on rushing the intersection at high speed. Or, alternatively, could end up with the kid getting hit at 45 miles an hour, with extremely fatal and destructive results.

You can say the same thing about high speed trains now. The difference is, a well set up automated system is probably the best odds a kid is going to get at survival because if all the cars are networked they will know ahead of time there is someone rapidly braking ahead of them.

I think you’re imagining a system with no real-world engineering difficulties, and then presuming everyone else is also imagining it.

Re: Uber was supposed to help traffic. It didn’t. Robotaxis will be even worse

#112

Post by [deleted] »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #98
jprete wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The prerequisite technology for an automated bus system is not the ability to take the driver out of the bus. The prerequisite is the ability to credibly signal to all the potential passengers what buses are going where they want to go, where they should get on those buses, and where they are supposed to get off. All of the automation of bus routes involved is simple computation and I don't see AI having anything fun…

That would work pretty well. Just hail a bus with your phone, it tells you where to walk and what bus to get on, and where to get off on that bus, and how to finish your trip on foot or by connecting to another bus. It could all easily be integrated into Apple or google maps. No more fixed bus routes, just a bunch of AI buses driving around filling needs dynamically.

[deleted]

Re: Uber was supposed to help traffic. It didn’t. Robotaxis will be even worse

#113

Post by jprete »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #98
jprete wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The prerequisite technology for an automated bus system is not the ability to take the driver out of the bus. The prerequisite is the ability to credibly signal to all the potential passengers what buses are going where they want to go, where they should get on those buses, and where they are supposed to get off. All of the automation of bus routes involved is simple computation and I don't see AI having anything fun…

That would work pretty well. Just hail a bus with your phone, it tells you where to walk and what bus to get on, and where to get off on that bus, and how to finish your trip on foot or by connecting to another bus. It could all easily be integrated into Apple or google maps. No more fixed bus routes, just a bunch of AI buses driving around filling needs dynamically.

Human drivers could easily do that today, which is why I’m saying that robot buses are not in any way a prerequisite for that system.

Re: Uber was supposed to help traffic. It didn’t. Robotaxis will be even worse

#114

Post by Ekaros »

bsder wrote: post #53
nytesky wrote: post #5

Wasn’t the point of taxi medallions to limit traffic in the first place?

No, medallions were not meant to limit traffic. Medallions were the answer to the race to the bottom that occurred (too many taxis, not enough fares, shady behavior from the taxis)--just like we are seeing again. Everybody seems to forget that laws that exist are there because there was a reason . The fact that medallions became perverted into entrenched monopolies was a problem that should have been solved rather th…

The biggest failure with medallions from outside perspective was that they could be transferred. Licensing for taxis does make sense, but those should not be transferable outside selling the whole corporation. And they should be returned in bankruptcy or retirement to a pool to be redistributed.

Re: Uber was supposed to help traffic. It didn’t. Robotaxis will be even worse

#115

Post by acdha »

mike_d wrote: post #85
BurningFrog wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The benefit comes when prices reach the level where traffic flows at full speed. This increases the traffic throughput by maybe 5x, which makes the road much more useful.

> The benefit comes when prices reach the level where traffic flows at full speed. How then does your gardener get his truck to your house? Your DoorDash driver? The elderly woman on a fixed income who needs to get to her doctors appointment? Roads cannot be the domain of the rich. (Also please don't pretend that public transport is even remotely viable in the US)

> How then does your gardener get his truck to your house? Your DoorDash driver? The elderly woman on a fixed income who needs to get to her doctors appointment?

The whole idea is to reduce peak demand. Your gardener doesn’t need to go downtown at the same time as office workers, so they are unlikely to be affected since they’re going to your house rather than your office and they can show up at 10am. Similarly, getting breakfast from DoorDash across town is not a human right - you can order closer to home or pay market rate for use of a couple hundred feet of public space to haul your burrito.

Re: Uber was supposed to help traffic. It didn’t. Robotaxis will be even worse

#116

Post by jprete »

mortureb wrote: post #74
jprete wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think that people would be on the road _less_ if everyone were using taxis instead of personal cars? If so, why? What's the actual reason why robotaxis reduce the demand, or consumption, of road miles?

Of course. If automated driving was the only way you could get around it would make no sense to get your own vehicle.

This doesn’t answer my question, which was about road miles per person, not private car ownership.

Re: Uber was supposed to help traffic. It didn’t. Robotaxis will be even worse

#117

Post by seanmcdirmid »

jprete wrote: post #113
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would work pretty well. Just hail a bus with your phone, it tells you where to walk and what bus to get on, and where to get off on that bus, and how to finish your trip on foot or by connecting to another bus. It could all easily be integrated into Apple or google maps. No more fixed bus routes, just a bunch of AI buses driving around filling needs dynamically.

Human drivers could easily do that today, which is why I’m saying that robot buses are not in any way a prerequisite for that system.

We can’t staff our fixed routes today, our agency is flush with cash but they can’t hire enough bus drivers with that cash, so they are cutting routes anyways forcing more more people back into cars. So obviously they couldn’t handle wide spread smaller buses with dynamic routing…maybe if they take a big subsidy on para transit, but that’s niche.

Re: Uber was supposed to help traffic. It didn’t. Robotaxis will be even worse

#118

Post by taylodl »

diogenes4 wrote: post #105
willcipriano wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> can't think of any other factor that lowers the quality of life in cities Meanwhile I think nothing lowers quailty of life more than living in a city. That said I don't go into them so you guys can do whatever you like.

This is a very common attitude with americans that dwell in the country. It's just your bog-standard fear of change and the unknown. Granted, living in the city does reduce your life expectancy by about five years... mostly because of car usage. If only we could figure out how to better distribute labor across a country and not just in cities.

In the United States, people living in urban areas have a slightly longer life expectancy than people living in rural areas. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), life expectancy at birth in urban areas in 2021 was 78.7 years, compared to 78.6 years in rural areas.

Apparently the gap was wider, they blame air pollution for the rural areas catching up. The big advantage urban areas have is rapid access to healthcare.

Re: Uber was supposed to help traffic. It didn’t. Robotaxis will be even worse

#119

Post by taylodl »

mortureb wrote: post #26
MBCook wrote: post #19

It’s almost as if robotaxis are solving the problem in a way that they can make money off of, not trying to be an actual solution. Why would investors do that? Oh right. Robotaxis are just an attempt to do Uber without having to pay drivers. They’re not an attempt at fixing congestion. Or safety (though I’m sure they claim it). Or bad public transit. They’re aiming for the local maxima. “Fix” taxis/Uber as they exist…

Nah what you luddite. You seem more concerned about maintaining artificial jobs and stifling progress to “prevent people getting rich off of it”. Having a 100% automated driving system will fix traffic. It will be better for the environment. It will give us back more time in our day.

Once you've figured out how to make me whole for the cars and motorcycles I've invested in and can no longer use because of a 100% automated driving system then we can talk.

If you don't have a solution for that then you can just sit down and STFU.

Re: Uber was supposed to help traffic. It didn’t. Robotaxis will be even worse

#120

Post by tim333 »

MBCook wrote: post #49
diogenes4 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meanwhile i'm trying to figure out if any city in the us is willing to ban cars. I can't think of any other factor that lowers the quality of life in cities that even comes close to them.

I’d love to see some of the east, where there were cities built long before cars that have some of the public transit infrastructure necessary, to start doing what Paris and other places have done by removing cars from streets and replacing them with walkable parks and neighborhood shops and gathering places. More like they used to be. New York, Philadelphia, Washington DC, there’s plenty of places that could do it.…

I guess in places like LA you can to limited areas like the 3rd st mall and expand (https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@34.01585,-118.4963694,3a,90y,...)

And in London they have patches like the bit near Kings Cross I like https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5349883,-0.125411,3a,75y,7...

I guess you could gradually make those and link them with tube / rail etc

Post reply on HN