Will Self-Driving Cars Clog Our Highways? (go.com) 655
An anonymous reader writes: While self-driving cars may be safer and cheaper, the Associated Press warns they could also create massive traffic congestion. "The problem, say transportation researchers, is that people will use them too much." One auto industry expert predicts that self-driving cars will increase travel by those over 65, as well as those between 16 and 24, resulting in at least 2 trillion extra miles being driven each year. In addition, "Airlines also may face new competition as people choose to travel by car at speeds well over 100 mph between cities a few hundred miles apart instead of flying," and faster commute times could mean more urban sprawl as workers may spread into cheaper neighborhoods that are further from the city center.
The taxi / mini bus idea will also do the same (Score:2)
The taxi / mini bus idea will also do the same with a high number of them needing to go and force from some depot before / after rush hour.
Yeah, so... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yeah, so... (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure, but the main builder of roads is the government. And if we're going to build more roads, we'll need more spending on roads, which means more taxes. People do not like taxes.
I find that people would rather spend hundreds of dollars per year in wasted gas/time in traffic than see their taxes go up by half that amount.
Re:Yeah, so... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
The insurance companies can take care of the rest.
A little checkbox on your next renewal saying "This car will be piloted by a human" will double or triple your premiums.
And a little rider that says "If the car was under control of a human during the time of incident we decline all payouts"
Re: (Score:3)
They'll need to be completely separated. You can't have SDCs doing 100mph next to a lane of HDCs going 55mph. The first time some jackass on his cellphone weaves slightly into the SDC lane, you'll have a huge pileup. The only way to mitigate that is for the SDCs to either go slower in order to be able to brake for such a situation, or to separate them from HDC lanes.
Re:Yeah, so... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, I'd think it would be a GOOD thing that Senior Citizens wouldn't be homebound.
And that teenagers could get home from parties safely.
Congestion Intelligence? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
With the use of Google Maps, my HDC is already embracing congestion avoidance. I have at least 4 viable routes home, before I leave the office I check and take the most attractive one at the time (or stay put if they all suck.)
Re: (Score:3)
That will only be a problem for a brief period. It took less than a decade for cars to make horse-drawn carriages almost entirely disappear. SDCs are likely to do the same to HDCs and likely even faster.
I weep for the airline industry. (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh wait... not weeping... the other thing.
Over the last couple of decades the airline industry has been going well out of their way to make sure that flying is unpleasant an experience as possible. Granted, they've had no small amount of cooperation from the government. But I've not a doubt in the world that some properly-directed lobbying and cries of "impacting the bottom line" would have returned the TSA thugs to their former jobs delivering pizza and greeting people at walmart ten or more years ago, if the airlines weren't complicit. And even aside from the TSA goons, they've reduced seat pitch, cut amenities, overbooked flights, run flights behind schedule or cancelled them,, eliminated meal services, and started nickel-and-diming with every sort of added fee imaginable, all 100% on their own initiative.
I've no bloody sympathy for them at all. A pox upon their houses.
Uber, not Airline Industry (Score:2)
The airline industry may contract somewhat but lets face it they don't make most of their money from short hops between cities within a few hours drive of each other. In fact if they are smart about it and run a self-driving airport bus service the
Re:Uber, not Airline Industry (Score:4, Insightful)
I believe this was Uber's game all along:
1) Introduce 'taxi' system at lower price point
2) Collect data, prefect swarm algorithm
3) Add 'autopilot' features to cars so that they can go to a fare automaticly
4) Remove drivers entirely
5) Switch for an audible-like subscription plan where I can have X trips for Y$ each month. Utilize swarm data from #2 to 'hover' cars where needed during peak hours so that service time is quick
6) profit!
Re: (Score:3)
They were reducing seat pitch, overbooking flights and cheaping out on inflight refreshment starting from the day of deregulation.
Before deregulation, they were guaranteed a good profit on every route they flew and they competed for customers based on service.
Since deregulation, fares have plummeted and service has been a race to the bottom to support ever decreasing fares.
Re: (Score:3)
Last time I flew, the Uber from home to SFO was $21.73. I don't think I could get a flight across the bay for that, much less across the state, country, or continent. The cheapest airfares I see with any regularity are the $99 tickets to Las Vegas. And seeing as I can't even fly to LA, or Sacramento for that matter, that cheaply, I have a strong suspicion that those are partly subsidized by the casinos.
Re: I weep for the airline industry. (Score:2)
Going across the bay is a contrived example.
Flights from KSFO to KLAX on Virgin America can be as low as $68 + tax.
Re: (Score:3)
Interesting. When I was typing my previous post, I checked on Orbitz and the cheapest LAX fare was $116 on Spirit. I see on Virgin's own site that you are indeed correct though. Still, that's a lot more than the cost of Ubering to the airport, which was the benchmark the person I was replying to set.
Also, Virgin is not long for this world. They're in the process of being purchased by Alaska Air. Damn shame too. They were one of the very few US-based carriers to at least make an effort at making the fl
Re: I weep for the airline industry. (Score:2)
At one point you could fly direct between KSBA and KSJC. Not anymore. On weekends flights can cost anywhere between $500-$1000 per seat to KSFO. It is actually cheaper sometimes to rent a plane and fly to KPAO for you GA enthusiasts.
I don't mind cost cutting. I'm not one to gripe about lack of amenities. I just haven't seen the price fall here and I have fewer choices.
Nah (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine cities where only autonomous cars are allowed. Traffic lights could be a thing of the past, with cars crossing allowing only a few inches of space between them
The real problem becomes pedestrians. If you know that the cars will avoid you, what's to stop you from crossing the road at any time?
Re: (Score:2)
We were theoretically getting 100+mph interstate highways, up until the first OPEC thing.
There's nothing inherently more efficient about automated cars travelling at high speeds - in heavy traffic they can draft each other a bit more safely, but after the first 100 car pile-up, I doubt they'll continue to do that.
More mile driven/ridden? Sure. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't you believe it...
Around where i work, all the over 65s visit the bank during lunchtime, when those of us who have to work are on our lunch break. During the mornings and afternoons the banks are empty, the over 65s generally don't have to work yet for some reason they choose to visit banks during the most congested time, and cause those of us with a short time limited lunch break to waste all of it stood in a queue.
Rabble rabble rabble (Score:5, Insightful)
No of course not, dumbass (Score:2)
Maybe an AI driving a car won’t be as good as some of the best drivers, but they’ll certainly be better than average. The main advantage is that they can take into account traffic factors that human drivers won’t be aware of, so they can optimize travel. There will be fewer accidents, and traffic will move more smoothly. At safer and more consistent speeds, people will get to their destinations sooner, and they’ll use less energy to do it.
EVs will drive cost / mile to new lows (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
OTOH, Tesla's Model 3 is coming and will be be dirt cheap to own. THe reason is that Tesla has a small management team, and keeps things TIGHT. In addition, they are bringing all parts inhouse so as to lower all of
Not thinking big picture. (Score:5, Interesting)
These people aren't thinking big picture. Forget a fleet of self owned self-driving cars. Yes, self-car ownership is a staple of American life right now, but it's death knell has been sounded.
Imagine a fleet of hundreds of self driving buses, vans, et cetera. Now cross that with Uber -- request a ride, and you get put on a list of stops where the bus is going to go. Picture having to wait no more than 15 minutes for a self-driving public transportation vehicle to take you anywhere in your city, with algorithms picking the most efficient route to get who needs a ride, when they need it. Who is going to buy their own car when you can just get a public transportation pass and go anywhere?
Hell, what government is going to allow people to drive their own cars when self-driving vehicles can drive for them? And when even self-driving self-owned cars turn out to be a detriment to the self-driving public transportation, welp...
We don't consider horses when designing modern roadways, outside of some very specific scenarios. We're entering an era where considering manually driven cars are going to become a similar relic of the past.
Re:Not thinking big picture. (Score:4, Insightful)
Picture having to wait no more than 15 minutes for a self-driving public transportation vehicle to take you anywhere in your city, with algorithms picking the most efficient route to get who needs a ride, when they need it. Who is going to buy their own car when you can just get a public transportation pass and go anywhere?
Hell, what government is going to allow people to drive their own cars when self-driving vehicles can drive for them? And when even self-driving self-owned cars turn out to be a detriment to the self-driving public transportation, welp...
We don't consider horses when designing modern roadways, outside of some very specific scenarios. We're entering an era where considering manually driven cars are going to become a similar relic of the past.
Yes, people will still buy vehicles. Why? Construction, specialized vehicles (camper trailers), towing (boats, horses, etc.), and I could go on and on. Self-driving vehicles not "owned" by individuals will work for most people who live in urban areas, but they still aren't going to work for a lot of applications. There is NO way that ALL roads will support self-driving cars. The are a large number of back country roads, dirt roads through woods, etc. that will not get the necessary infrastructure to support self-driving vehicles. So. to answer your second question, Yes, people will still have the right to drive their own vehicles. Maybe it would require specialized hardware installed (i.e. a transponder, etc.) or maybe cars will have a manual mode, but there is no way that there will be an outright ban.
Not thinking Human Nature (Score:2)
Imagine a fleet of hundreds of self driving buses, vans, et cetera
And every one of those is packed with other people.
If you don't think anyone who can will want their OWN self driving pod, the they do not have to wait to ride, you are nuts.
There will also be self-driving cars and buses, sure. But the price of a "car" will lower and more people than ever will own and use them because privacy and convenience will still be desirable for generations to come, if not forever...
Re: (Score:2)
You know, you just missed a perfectly good opportunity for a "Beowulf cluster" joke.
The New Text Message? (Score:2)
And suppose you use your "self driving car" just to make little trips back and forth to friend like we "text" right now? Send the car with a small package, send the car with a joke, send the car... For anything?
Change is bad (Score:2)
Unless it's YOUR change.
If self-driving cars enable those for whom driving became dangerous to be mobile again, then so be it. Uber is that current solution, just without the freedom of being alone in the car. And even Uber wants to go driverless.
And if congestion is the problem, ignoring the need for roadway and capacity is the current solution, so what's the difference? Higher taxes for road improvement/construction/maintenance? Our current administration had/has the opportunity to 'invest' in infrastruc
Re: (Score:2)
The solution to congestion is to reduce the concentration of journeys, not just increase the capacity.
Far too many hours are wasted by people travelling to work at the same place and at the same time, and you end up with massive over capacity at all other times.
Spread things out more, have workplaces which are closer to where people can actually live, have more people working from home, work different hours.
Let's Wait And See (Score:2)
Right now all that self-driving cars are clogging is our blogs and forums. It will be awhile before we know what they'll do in the real world. A variable, still to be determined 'awhile', mind you.
Where we live, our address wasn't even on the online mapping software until about six years ago. I'm not that expectant that a 'self driving car' will figure everything out immediately. Though I suppose they will 'learn' obscure locations by one or two manual drives there in 'learn mode.'
Why even have a house or apartment? (Score:3)
If you were single why not just buy a self-driving minivan and go wherever to sleep for the night? If you could rig it with some kind of simple shower and use an RV hookup ever week or so (that could be automated to happen while you were at work) it would be a better arrangement than most cramped first apartments...
The other thing to consider also, is that only a lot of miles built up in self-driving cars will give society the trust it needs to go ahead with the next step - self-driving flying cars (or drones if you will).
At last, one urban transport culture for all (Score:2)
Right now, the people who ride city transit systems are for the most part not the same people who drive. Drivers are in the habit of using their cars whenever they can, and vote for transit only when they think that buses and trains will take people off the road and out of their way.
But once autonomous car use becomes general, the whole culture of "my car" will be replaced by a rental culture in which people summon a car when needed for single rides. The attraction of ditching car payments, insurance paymen
No. Stupid question: yes. (Score:2)
That is really all to be said about this alarmist drivel.
Downtown traffic (Score:2)
With self-driving cars, there will be another option: Drive your own car to your office in downtown, and then send it along to park itself in some free or much cheaper parking place on the other side of town where it can wait until you are ready to be picked up again - that alone would lead to a l
Driving software... (Score:2)
So which is it? (Score:3, Interesting)
So which one are they worried about?
People use them too much and traffic grinds to a halt?
Or people choose to use them instead of flying because they can go over 100 mph on highways?
It's not going to work both ways, guys.
Re:No downside (Score:4, Funny)
this new technology opens doors for me.
They drive themselves, but I think you still have to open the door yourself.
Lazy bastard.
Re:No downside (Score:5, Insightful)
Commute times will drop significantly when there are self-driving-only lanes, and the makers come up with a single protocol for communication, so they operate more like an indefinite length train than a line of cars.
Re: (Score:2)
Commute times will drop significantly when there are self-driving-only lanes, and the makers come up with a single protocol for communication, so they operate more like an indefinite length train than a line of cars.
V2V is never going to be as reliable as a big steel coupling.
Re: (Score:2)
If you live in the U.S. (anywhere other than the NE megalopolis) rail transport of people has been obsolete for a long long time already.
Re: (Score:2)
No. One engine vs many. Less friction. Etc. Rail is still better.
If energy consumption is the only consideration, sure. But rail travel is inconvenient in important ways. You have to travel on the train's schedule and you have to use other modes of transportation to/from the rail station.
I can see self-driving cars killing commuter rail. Lots of rail commuters are presently accepting longer commute times in exchange for being able to read, work, sleep or whatever else on their way. Self-driving cars would allow them to do that and have the shorter commute times, and do
Re: (Score:2)
Low-speed consumer rail, for sure. High-speed... probably not. That's why we need high-speed rail sooner rather than later. Otherwise, it will never get built, and we'll continue wasting huge amounts of energy unnecessarily sending passengers 30,000 feet up into the air until we run out of fossil fuels to power them.
Re: No downside (Score:2)
What will really be interesting is to see how SDCs perform optomally, if the right speed is really higher t
Re: Is this a joke? (Score:2)
Hello, electronic computers already made us bad at math. There used to be lots of people who made their livings by adding columns of numbers, doing multiplication and division and logarithms! Now those things are done by people only as curiosities, and basically nobody could make a living doing them. QED, or GED, or whatever.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Not only that, but autonomous vehicles could tell in advance which routes they would be using in the next few hours, so that large-scale traffic could adapt and no congestion would ever arise.
Only if it knows in advance where it's going, I'm not going to schedule when I leave for work or whether I stop for groceries on the way home or not. I guess other types of autonomous cars might, but they usually try to avoid rush hour anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
No congestion ever? Sounds like a communist plot to me. In true capitalism, the roads are only maintained and expanded as needed to address pressing issues - thus, there will always be congestion.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
3. In addition, "Airlines also may face new competition as people choose to travel by car at speeds well over 100 mph between cities a few hundred miles apart instead of flying," and faster commute times could mean more urban sprawl as workers may spread into cheaper neighborhoods that are further from the city center.
A: same as number 2, just because you have a self-driving car won't make it magically cheaper to drive somewhere. And unless we change laws, nobody's going to be legally driving at 100 mph between cities any time soon. Not with the "quality" of our current highways.
Yes, this one is definitely strange. I can already go to a city 8 hours away very cheaply if I'm willing to ride a bus. The one advantage that I see of a self-driving car would actually not affect congestion. With a self-driving "sleeper" car, I could get in at bedtime and wake up at my destination. This is currently low traffic time. Now self-driving cars are going to drastically change things but if people are smart about it, it might actually reduce traffic. For instance, my groceries could be deli
Re:False (Score:4, Insightful)
> 1. While self-driving cars may be safer and cheaper
> A: Self-driving cars are nowhere near cheaper at the moment.
If self-driving cars are really as much safer as Google's data and claims indicate, they will very quickly become cheaper to own and operate, even if the initial purchase price is slightly higher.
Think actuarial tables. Every self-driving car is loaded with sensors and data recorders. All of this data will eventually get into the hands of the insurance companies. And if Google's claims on self-driving cars prove to be true (And have we been given reason to believe otherwise?), the actuaries will update their tables, and premiums for manual-driving cars will skyrocket.
If you're an enthusiast, you'll probably still be able to take your Miata out on weekends. Just keep the annual milage below 5000. But everyday commuting? Going out for a night on the town? It'll be significantly cheaper to use self-drivers.
Re: (Score:2)
With self-driving cars that data will instead go directly to Google, marketers and the US government.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, at first. That's why I said "eventually". But do you really think the insurance companies *won't* get access? Already, some will give you a discount on your premiums if you plug a little widget which they supply into your OBD2 port, which sends your car's data back to them. There's even a "per mile" insurance company that uses that same data to charge you for only your true milage, not the guesstimate you make for a year when you first buy the policy. Self-driving data is probably too complex to
Re: (Score:3)
And if Google's claims on self-driving cars prove to be true (And have we been given reason to believe otherwise?), the actuaries will update their tables, and premiums for manual-driving cars will skyrocket.
It's more likely that the premiums for self-driving cars will plummet. The factor that will cause them to skyrocket is that if every self-driving car is covered up to $10M(say) by the manufacturer, and they're proving to be that safe, is that society won't be satisfied with the $100k/300k, $250k/500k policies most people are running around with now, and require that private drivers carry $10M or so themselves (probably pausing at $1M, $5M, and such). While each subsequent dollar of coverage is cheaper tha
Re: (Score:2)
self-driving cars wouldn't drive like the idiots who are causing the congestion right now.
This! There will be plenty of room on the roads for the additional vehicles. Also, things will be safer as there will be fewer teenagers actually driving and elderly people get some of their mobility back. It's all win.
Re: (Score:2)
Just wait until they invent the self-driving mobility scooter. You're gonna want to stay out of the Wal-mart.
Re:False (Score:5, Insightful)
Try these:
While microwaves may be safer and cheaper than regular ovens, the alarmist press warns they could also create obesity "The problem, say kitchen appliance researchers, is that people will use them too much."
While computers may be safer and cheaper, the alarmist press warns they could also create over-forestation by replacing paper records "The problem, say accounting researchers, is that people will use them too much."
While televisions may be safer and cheaper than traveling to the theater, the alarmist press warns they could also create widespread job loss among stage actors "The problem, say media researchers, is that people will use them too much."
While wooden tables may be safer and cheaper, the alarmist press warns they could also create more expensive wood "The problem, say carpentry researchers, is that people will use them too much."
While cotton mills may be safer and cheaper, the alarmist press warns they could also create unemployment "The problem, say union researchers, is that people will use them too much."
Are there any random products you couldn't fill into this sentence? Very meaningful speculation... why, it's almost Luddite....
Re:may might predicts (Score:5, Insightful)
By platooning [wikipedia.org], SDCs can drive much closer together than HDCs, and they also help to smooth out the "accordion effect" in stop-and-go traffic. It is unlikely that they will increase congestion. It is far more likely that they will help relieve congestion.
Large fixed-route public buses will be replaced by small self-driving vans, with flexible on-demand routing. As public transit becomes faster and more convenient, more people will use it, reducing congestion even more.
Re:may might predicts (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:may might predicts (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem with parking isn't that there's no parking, it's that there's no parking sufficiently close to where you want to go that you don't mind walking the remaining distance. With self-driving cars that can drop you off then go park themselves, and be summoned when you are ready to leave, this won't be a problem.
Re:may might predicts (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, SDCs can park much closer together, since the door doesn't need to open to disgorge humans, so they can park with only inches between cars. If they can retract their mirrors (or if the mirrors are replaced with cameras), then they can park even closer. If they have car-to-car communication, then they can park head-to-tail as well as side-by-side, and cooperate to make room for a summoned car to leave. A typical parking lot could hold 2 or 3 times as many SDCs as HDCs.
Re:may might predicts (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
A car park with cars parked right next to each other will need to be defragged.
No problem. We'll just create journalling parking systems.
Re: (Score:3)
Also, SDCs can park much closer together, since the door doesn't need to open to disgorge humans, so they can park with only inches between cars. If they can retract their mirrors (or if the mirrors are replaced with cameras), then they can park even closer. If they have car-to-car communication, then they can park head-to-tail as well as side-by-side, and cooperate to make room for a summoned car to leave. A typical parking lot could hold 2 or 3 times as many SDCs as HDCs.
That's how a freight yard works for the railroad. Of course, if the car is in the middle of the line, and you need to move 100 cars to get to yours, it will be about as efficient as a railroad trying to cherry pick a single car out of the yard. It simple won't happen.
Re:may might predicts (Score:5, Insightful)
You won't want self-driving cars to circle the block wasting juice. Each ride will be a separate rental from your chosen company's fleet. As you check out at the mall or the market, you summon a new ride. Released cars will rest in buffer lots near shopping areas until someone needs a new ride. These will differ from conventional parking lots in not having to be walking distance from shopping, and not being associated with specific shops. Instead, they will be at "summoning distance" from all shopping in a given area. Much less city land devoted to parking, because none of it has to be for "your" car. There will be no more inner-city crapola about "the rightmost ten spaces in this lot is reserved for customers of Bertha's Kitty Boutique."
Re: (Score:2)
Re:may might predicts (Score:5, Informative)
Haven't you used Uber? It tells you, with pretty high accuracy, how long it will take for a car to show up, how long the ride will take, and what the cost will be. You can summon your ride as you sit down for breakfast and by the time you are done it will be there. If you are out at dinner, you order the car when you get the check and it's there pretty much when you are ready for it. Surge pricing is a wonderful incentive to get people using cars when the roads are less busy, or to take a short trip to a train rather than to pay for a full commute. I think it is a great primary solution, and a natural evolution from services like Zipcar.
Re:may might predicts (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You can summon your ride as you sit down for breakfast and by the time you are done it will be there. If you are out at dinner, you order the car when you get the check and it's there pretty much when you are ready for it.
So in my family of four, we could in theory order four robot cars (we each work and go to school at different locations). In my use case, that makes 4 times as many vehicles on the road. A road that is already over capacity today.
I think you missed the point of TFA
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
That's an awful primary solution. I don't want to wait 10 mins for a car, I want one in my driveway.
You won't wait 10 minutes. This is a trivial problem in queuing theory. You have an algorithm to predict demand, and you preemptively dispatch cars to meet that demand. So when you walk out of the mall, the next car will pull up a few seconds after you request it. If demand is under predicted, you may wait a few more seconds, but not 10 minutes. If demand is over-predicted, you just have a few cars loop back to the staging lot.
Same thing with commuting from neighborhoods: The car companies will know th
Re: (Score:3)
So when you walk out of the mall, the next car will pull up a few seconds after you request it. If demand is under predicted, you may wait a few more seconds, but not 10 minutes.
That works until you combine multiple trips where you're picking things up in different places. If you don't have a dedicated vehicle you have to haul all that stuff around. I routinely will take a bicycle or two somewhere, go for a long ride, then stop a few places on the way home for shopping (sometimes bulk). So either I leave the stuff (which can add up to quite a lot) in the car and wait for the car, or I haul it around with me (unworkable). Parking lots local to the shopping work much better for m
Re: (Score:2)
Your chosen company? No, people will still own their own cars. Nobody wants to give up the MUCH higher convenience level of that. As such you'll still have all the same problems.
Re: (Score:2)
No, people will still own their own cars.
The average American household has 2.3 cars. My family has 3. When on-demand SDCs are available, we will likely reduce that to 2, and maybe to 1. On demand SDC rides will almost certainly be cheaper than ownership. Ownership may not go away completely, but it will be drastically reduced.
Nobody wants to give up the MUCH higher convenience level of that.
You mean the convenience of walking 200 meters in the cold rain through a parking lot to get to your car, while the SDC-Uber customers are picked up at the curb, under an awning?
Re:may might predicts (Score:4, Insightful)
I have a lot of stuff in my car, some could be extraneous or standard with a car service sure. The rest not so much. Standard safety bits could be in every one bout I doubt it to many people are clueless but realy the last thing I want to make a long drive through the desert in is a fleet car. Thats basic traffic safety and lets not get stranded can not picture a fleet car with duct tape, bailing wire, and enough tools to limp back to civilization. Past that you have first aid, I can pack a lot of stuff in a car kit including an AED, I dont see some fleet service stocking them standard, thats also a decent selection of OTC meds like headache and GI but also a supply of scripts. Basic provisions so thats a few days rations + more immediate snacks and water. Emergency clothing a spare pair of sweatpants and sweatshirt for everybody, more stuff for the baby, and rain gear all around. Lets not even start on baby's thats a lot of stuff all in itself. Simple bits like cell phone chargers and flashlights. In any event I'm got the better part of a duffel bag of stuff going around with me even more in the truck that I'm not wanting to take with me all the time to go vehicle to vehicle. This whole it will be a service is some sort of city folk thing that would not serve the other 99% of the land mass (or whatever the city to non city percentage is). Their only concern is parking and the mall it seems, not sure why I would want to go to the mall and parking is easy just stop living in the hell hole that is a city.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm not worried about getting stranded where there is cellphone reception. Worried about getting stranded where I'm looking at ham radio or sat based communications. I doubt the fleet cars will be putting in sat uplinks.
While everything fits in the duffel it's not something that you want to drag around with you vs leaving in the car.
Re:may might predicts (Score:4, Interesting)
You won't want self-driving cars to circle the block wasting juice. Each ride will be a separate rental from your chosen company's fleet.
This should be marked insightful - but you'll probably be pilloried. Think Uber, now think Uber without drivers. Now think vehicles being dispatched via the internet via an application on your smartphone.
Now think a driverless car version of surge pricing, as well with with a hierarchy of plans, where the more oyu pay, the better, and quicker service you'll get.
The legions of slashdot users that think they are going to all have their personal driverless vehicle are not thinking this through. As driverless vehicles take over, the only people left that know how to drive will be in rural areas.
Re: (Score:3)
Elevator travel is usually point-to-point. You get in (carrying your luggage), you get out (still carrying your luggage). Also, travel distances (and times) are quite short, if you need multiple trips to get all your luggage, you can, assuming you have a friend or someone else to guard your luggage
Car may be used for point-to-point travel (same as elevator), but can also be used for multidrop travel to pick up more luggage at each stop, drop off luggage at each stop or a combination of both. Also, travel di
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
4 hours of driving, at say 60 mpg(assuming it's a hybrid), at an average of 20 mph. That's 1.3 gallons. $5 worth of gas?
Now, how many towns wouldn't have somewhere free to park within 20 miles?
Or, what happens when the city, like a few cities already have, institute a 'congestion charge' that charges by the mile?
Re:may might predicts (Score:5, Insightful)
Just the fact that a SDC can drive much closer means that at least 2-3 times as many vehicles can fit in the same stretch of road as before. Combine that with the ability to replace traffic signals, stop signs, and it means faster driving overall. Highway intersections that require multi-level construction can be replaced by a simple four-way, with vehicle computers adjusting speed so they can go through safely and at highway speeds.
Of course, there is one reason why SDCs will be overall better than HDCs: Wrecks. Lower the chance of those happening, it it will help immensely. There is also the fact that SDCs don't get drunk, tripping, high, or in a state that renders them unusable for driving. This is arguably the chief cause of wrecks, so by that factor being further mitigates, it will help traffic flow and overall commute times significantly.
Re:may might predicts (Score:5, Interesting)
All good points, but the elephant in this particular room is unexpected emergent behavior of a large coordinated system. If SDCs are centrally controlled, there's a single point of failure that will make EVERYONE late for work at unexpected intervals. If they are more distributed in their control systems, interesting (not in a good way) interactions will develop that cause unexpected system failures and disruptions.
Overall, I expect SDCs will improve the current state of automotive transport, but I don't expect them to be the panacea that everyone likes to paint a picture of.
alternative methods to an end... (Score:4, Insightful)
Your point applies only if SDCs are centrally controlled. If they are each an independent node that communicates with each other in a P2P or C2C method depending on massively decreased reaction times and localized road information that makes them much less vulnerable to a single point of failure while still retaining the bulk of the advantages. I foresee a hybrid of the 2 systems being the end solution, but I also bought Betamax, and laserdisc so who knows
summary contradicts itself (Score:4, Interesting)
The summary also indicates that it would likely REDUCE congestion, at least in some areas.
Suppose right now my 20-mile commute takes 35 minutes, so for 35 minutes I'm causing part of the congestion. I'm in your way from 8:00 to 8:35. The summary says self-driving cars will likely be able to drive much faster (perhaps in what used to be HOV lanes). If my car goes faster, that means the 20-mile commute takes less time. I'd only be on the road(and in your way) for 20 minutes rather than 35 minutes.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm in your way from 8:00 to 8:35.
Was that you?!
There's a long skinny pedal on the right. It's called the accelerator. Get to know it. Make it your friend.
Re: (Score:3)
My home town still doesn't have a commercial airline.
Re: may might predicts (Score:5, Insightful)
There were no commercial airlines on September 12, 2001.
Yes there was, I flew from Auckland to Wellington that day.
Re: (Score:3)
Parent is correct. There were no commercial US flights on 9/12/2001, but the rest of the world still moved along.
quite the opposite (Score:2)
And the costs / mile will be quite cheap.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Eventually oil will start running out, sometime in the next few years...
That's what they said in the 70's.
In 1920 it was predicted that the world had enough oil to last 20 years. And that same prediction was made in 1940 and 1960.
Re:What about self-re-routing? (Score:4, Insightful)
The article makes wild assumptions about an increase of traffic without taking into account how much more efficiently self driving cars can make use of road infrastructure.
Re: (Score:2)
Darwin is rolling over in his grave.
Re: (Score:3)
No!
They will not clog our highways.
They will clog our traffic jams.
Was that a trick question?