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

A Week with Chauffeurs Showed the Major Flaw in a Self-Driving Car Future

jalopnik.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 205 posts

Re: A Week with Chauffeurs Showed the Major Flaw in a Self-Driving Car Future

#141

Post by em-bee »

kjksf wrote: post #3

Here's what this research tells me: demand for transportation is much higher than the current use of transportation. Current use is limited by cost and convenience. Self-driving car is likely to fix both so it'll lead to more use of transportation. This is a good thing. We're currently deprived and if things go well, we'll get more of what we want. The congestion problem is mostly overblown. First, maybe with rare ex…

demand for transportation is much higher than the current use of transportation.

this is an important observation. and the demand will only increase.

because as it is easier to get around we are more likely to meet people at further distances, leading to families that are connected across these distances and thus increasing the demand for travel even more.

Re: A Week with Chauffeurs Showed the Major Flaw in a Self-Driving Car Future

#142

Post by em-bee »

tda wrote: post #98
chadcmulligan wrote: post #75

I used chauffeured cars yesterday, I just shared them with other people. I went to the beach, and had no real plan, I thought I'll go here, clicked on my app and it told me where to go, usually walk a couple of hundred metres. I spent the day travelling and walking around cost about $20 and travelled a couple of hundred kilometres. I took my laptop and worked in between scenic spots. I was thinking about this yesterd…

If you think about it vehicles on asphalt/tyres (not buses as we know them) are superior to vehicles on tracks/steel wheels in every way (except rolling resistance). Vehicle to vehicle dista CE on the road can be as little as a few seconds, where on train tracks it is usually one to several minutes. Deadweight per passenger is in the range of 5-10x more for trainers vs buses. If a train breaks down, everything is blo…

trains travel at a much higher speed than cars. and they carry many more people at that speed. what you say may make sense for street trains or trams that have to share traffic with cars, but the comfort of a fast train on a dedicated rail is no comparison to any bus alternative today.

Re: A Week with Chauffeurs Showed the Major Flaw in a Self-Driving Car Future

#143

Post by CydeWeys »

BubRoss wrote: post #117
CydeWeys wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're forgetting the unoccupied trips. There will be unoccupied trips running errands even at rush hour, because why not, you're not sitting in traffic, just your car. Also you seem to be thinking more of the robotaxis model, but the article is talking about the more likely future of everyone continuing to own their own car, only now it can drive. If cars are driving back empty after a commute then rush hour will ha…

Wouldn't that be a trip that someone would normally be driving anyway? Also wouldn't it make sense to have a store deliver to lots of people on one circuit, this reducing traffic?

No, once you don't need to drive it personally you can run a lot more errands, and thus will. See the linked article.

And look at how much more random stuff people buy when a click of a mouse gets it delivered to your house vs having to go to stores looking for it.

Re: A Week with Chauffeurs Showed the Major Flaw in a Self-Driving Car Future

#144

Post by CydeWeys »

Supermancho wrote: post #136
spc476 wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So here's a hypothetical scenario. Car drives kids to school (in my experience, school tends to start before work). Drives back empty to pick up parent to drive to work. In the afternoon, car drives (empty) to pick up kids and drive them home, then drives (empty) back to work to pick up the parent. Half the time it's empty.

> Drives back empty to pick up parent to drive to work. This implies there are no other people for which a rideshare would be suitable in either direction at any given time. This seems, like an unreasonable way to predict how mass AV would work. Again, demand is asymmetrical, which means there are opportunities for aggregation and overlap, when talking about mass adoption to the point that "the majority of cars on th…

We're not talking about rideshares, we're talking about autonomous personal vehicles. Most people are not likely to give up their personal vehicles; they'll just have self-driving ones.

Re: A Week with Chauffeurs Showed the Major Flaw in a Self-Driving Car Future

#145

Post by CydeWeys »

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #126
spc476 wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So here's a hypothetical scenario. Car drives kids to school (in my experience, school tends to start before work). Drives back empty to pick up parent to drive to work. In the afternoon, car drives (empty) to pick up kids and drive them home, then drives (empty) back to work to pick up the parent. Half the time it's empty.

In your scenario the number of trips is the same but the car is more often empty because the parent doesn't have to chauffeur the kids around.

Now the parent can be in a different car at the same time, going something else, thus doubling the number of cars on the road.

Re: A Week with Chauffeurs Showed the Major Flaw in a Self-Driving Car Future

#146

Post by jcims »

bcrosby95 wrote: post #129
CydeWeys wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree, I think the politics of land use are more easily solvable than the simple physics problem of too many cars, not enough space. Plenty of other countries in the world (and even some US cities) have solved the land use problem to the point that most people don't use space-inefficient private vehicles to get around. It's solvable and there are working models to emulate. This is not true of your alternative.

It's not financially possible to fix this quickly. You're talking about tens of trillions of dollars in new housing, at a minimum. Then all the commercial, infrastructure, etc. on top of it.

That's the part I'm missing with this land use discussion. This isn't Sim City. Yes, mistakes were made, but shit's there now and nobody's moving unless they really get paid for it.

Re: A Week with Chauffeurs Showed the Major Flaw in a Self-Driving Car Future

#147

Post by handoflixue »

em-bee wrote: post #139
kamakazizuru wrote: post #135

The study has a major flaw in that it ignores the grouping effect that makes self-driving cars & fleets completely different from chauffers. Shared usage will: - most definitely happen in the case of "errand" like rides. The request to "pick up my shopping from Target" will be clubbed with 5-10 other similar requests and delivered at the same time. - lead to single rides being a rarity, and at best a perk like "first…

that sounds like wishful thinking to me. coordinating with other people is hard. and if the ride is free, why bother. also people want to stay independent and not have to share. the option to share an uber or equivalent for example is already there. every time i used it the trip took longer than had i not shared. missed a train because of it once too. so i doubt that sharing will happen as much as you think

> coordinating with other people is hard.

Only when you're driving around humans. When you're using automated cars to replace errands, it becomes a lot easier to coordinate a set of grocery pickups, laundry dropoffs, and so on.

With concepts like Amazon Lockers in apartment complexes, you can pick up their laundry from one locker, deliver cleaned goods to another, all while they're at work.

Re: A Week with Chauffeurs Showed the Major Flaw in a Self-Driving Car Future

#148

Post by [deleted] »

Spooky23 wrote: post #7
kjksf wrote: post #3

Here's what this research tells me: demand for transportation is much higher than the current use of transportation. Current use is limited by cost and convenience. Self-driving car is likely to fix both so it'll lead to more use of transportation. This is a good thing. We're currently deprived and if things go well, we'll get more of what we want. The congestion problem is mostly overblown. First, maybe with rare ex…

The problem is those numbers are off. With margin, the services are always more expensive. I drive a fancyish SUV, and my average per-trip cost is around $3. I can Uber for $8-10 minimum or ride a bus for $1.5. Robot cars are going to be more like Uber, as you won’t have the driver losing money on depreciation.

[deleted]

Re: A Week with Chauffeurs Showed the Major Flaw in a Self-Driving Car Future

#149

Post by BubRoss »

CydeWeys wrote: post #143
BubRoss wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't that be a trip that someone would normally be driving anyway? Also wouldn't it make sense to have a store deliver to lots of people on one circuit, this reducing traffic?

No, once you don't need to drive it personally you can run a lot more errands, and thus will. See the linked article. And look at how much more random stuff people buy when a click of a mouse gets it delivered to your house vs having to go to stores looking for it.

If one car is going in a loop and delivering to lots of people it would be less time on the road than all the cars of the individual errands.

Re: A Week with Chauffeurs Showed the Major Flaw in a Self-Driving Car Future

#150

Post by xnzakg »

CydeWeys wrote: post #102
erik_seaberg wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The number of people who need to commute during rush hour can't increase 83%. Maybe some transit commuters will switch to cars, but maybe some car commuters will finally be able to switch to transit if these make the first and last mile feasible. And 83% was the first and only week. Maybe the number doesn't stay that high once indulging in the novelty wears off.

You're forgetting the unoccupied trips. There will be unoccupied trips running errands even at rush hour, because why not, you're not sitting in traffic, just your car. Also you seem to be thinking more of the robotaxis model, but the article is talking about the more likely future of everyone continuing to own their own car, only now it can drive. If cars are driving back empty after a commute then rush hour will ha…

One way to prevent congestion would be to instead of paying for the distance traveled, you simply paid for the time the car is on the road, giving a financial incentive to send the car outside of rush hours. Would probably also cause people to use alternative routes rather than everyone trying to use the shortest one when is congested.
Post reply on HN