Image transcript:

Calvin (from Calvin & Hobbes) sitting at a lemonade stand, smiling, with a sign that reads, “Trains and micromobility are inevitably the future of urban transportation, whether society wants it or not. CHANGE MY MIND.”

  • SlopppyEngineer
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    With Uber and other ride hailing services it became clear that cheap point to point transport replaces trips that are otherwise being made with public transportation like buses, and thereby increasing traffic. There were also more trips in total done because of the convenience than were done before, thus also increasing traffic. It’s the classic Jevons paradox.

    Self driving taxis could certainly have the same effect or more if they are cheaper than ride hailing. The increase in usage can easily be greater than the number of private cars it replaces.

    • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Self-driving cars also have an added benefit, if they are exclusively on the road, in that they could eliminate traffic. But they won’t have exclusive access to the road, because people like driving cars. Interconnected compiters planning everyone’s trips could eliminate the need for stop signs, stop lights, or the slinky effect on highways, because it turns out comouters can be better drivers than the typical human driver. They just need to stop hitting pedestrians…

      • SlopppyEngineer
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        in that they could eliminate traffic

        That’s the question. Let’s say the roads are now exclusively self driving cars and they are so efficient they double the throughput of roads. Meanwhile commuters bought houses that are twice as far away from the city because those houses are cheaper, and now they can sleep and work in the car anyway, so twice as much traffic. Or all schoolkids not taking the schoolbus anymore and all going by individual autonomous car and all pensioners getting their robo-taxi to squeeze through rush hour every morning so they’re first at the supermarket for the freshest produce. It remains to be seen how that works out.

      • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s complete bullshit. The reason why there is congestion is because there are too many vehicles on the roadway. Changing the timing of the vehicles doesn’t eliminate the vehicles or the congestion. It’s a geometry problem.

          • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Uh excuse me wtf does that have to do anything.

            And no, I don’t think that. Just the complete polar opposite in fact.

            • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Because rather than fixing the problem, you think we can avoid it entirely with a completely unreasonable elimination of cars.

              Traffic exists because people are inefficient drivers. Congestion happens everywhere people live in sufficient densities, and it’s not the density you’re imagining.

              Fully automated driving is also unlikely to happen in our lifetimes, because people like driving. But it could happen eventually, because the variety of benefits over other forms of transportation. One of those benefits is reducing traffic.

              • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                What? I don’t think we can eliminate cars. Must have me confused with someone else.

                I totally agree with your points and I apology for the confusion or poor communication.