Scott
Harald Grunsky
SimonProD@GreenSky train tracks have the advantage of being secure from humans who ignore traffic rules...
Till O'Rly 
Well, https://www.reddit.com/r/BitchImATrain and https://www.reddit.com/r/idiotsincars show a lot of examples where people tried.
グレェ「grey」@SimonProD train tracks are also purportedly approximately 24x more economical to build and maintain than roads. @GreenSky
ocdtrekkie@SimonProD @GreenSky Mostly secure. Grade crossings being a top tool of Darwin Award seekers.
Amin Negm-Awad🇪🇺🌍@GreenSky BTW: I really wonder what the problem is that self-driving cars solve. The problem of not having enough drivers?!!?!
Aodhán
Sören@chucker You can drive taxis by humans.
I do not see the solved problem? Are taxi drivers a problem to you?
I do not see the solved problem? Are taxi drivers a problem to you?
Uli Kusterer (Not a kitteh)@uliwitness Ah, so the solved problem is that companys specialized in inefficient individual transport does not earn more money. Correct?
You know me: I do not think that this is a problem and at least I would solve it in a completely different way.
@RA_Negm @uliwitness I think “Instead of asking Siri how to get to X, I can ask to provide a self-driving car that’ll get me there” is a fun sci-fi concept, at least. And if it works well, less individual car ownership will be required, which helps with congestion and emissions. But that’s currently a huge if.
Instead, non-sci-fi levers we can pull already exist, such as investing in public transport, and making cities less car-focused.
@chucker "And if it works well, less individual car ownership will be required,"
No.
Why should self-driving reduce car ownership?
@chucker BTW: I've heard this point many times in relation to public transport (via busses).
It is obviously wrong. Not having enough bus drivers is not an existing problem.
@RA_Negm I didn’t say it would. “will be required” doesn’t mean the same as “will be the case”.
But regardless, yes, I think it would *eventually* lead to less ownership. A lot of people own cars because they consider it necessary for their commute, not because they enjoy driving. A self-driving car can do the commute for them and then be used for someone else.
@chucker I understood your toot. But there is no reasonable assumption that automated driving will lead to less car ownership. Making driving more convenient it might be that it will lead to more car ownership.
However, it is not a point in the discussion "What is the problem solved by automated driving?"
BTW: What you decribe is car sharing. This already exists.
Outeast@chucker @RA_Negm The big hole in that thesis remains that people need to commute at the same times, so you'd essentially need the same size fleet. Public transport and flexible and remote working are better solutions to that problem. The other biggie is the "need" for cars for longer journeys (holidays, business trips etc). Self-driving cars could improve such journeys, but that's not relevant to ownership. Rentals could already fill that gap: the issue is price.
@RA_Negm No, I'm saying the taxi companies want this, because they don't have to put up with drivers who want to be treated like humans.
eviloatmeal, resident Death Stranding 2 apologist (arch, btw)@RA_Negm @GreenSky The problem self-driving cars solve is trains (it's OK if you don't understand - you need a genius brain to adequately perform all the mental gymnastics required to frame trains as a problem).
https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/elon-musk-hyperloop-rail-17486877.php
Relevant excerpt:
"Then it came to light that the world’s richest man never intended to prove out the futuristic Hyperloop technology or build the proposed suction tube. Musk reportedly told his biographer, Ashlee Vance, that the Hyperloop proposal was motivated by “his hatred for California’s proposed high-speed rail system,” which he felt would be too slow, outdated and expensive. “With any luck, the high-speed rail would be canceled,” Vance wrote."
https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/elon-musk-hyperloop-rail-17486877.php
Relevant excerpt:
"Then it came to light that the world’s richest man never intended to prove out the futuristic Hyperloop technology or build the proposed suction tube. Musk reportedly told his biographer, Ashlee Vance, that the Hyperloop proposal was motivated by “his hatred for California’s proposed high-speed rail system,” which he felt would be too slow, outdated and expensive. “With any luck, the high-speed rail would be canceled,” Vance wrote."
Jon Brown@jb510 Gotcha! The soolution to your problem is using public transport instead of driving by car.
@RA_Negm awesome idea. If you could get them to provide any form of public transport within 50 miles of the tiny rural mountain town that I live in that’d be great.
@jb510 The solution doesn't change, because public transport is bad in your area. The improvement of public transport is still the solution.
@RA_Negm i strongly disagree, the solution does change. Public transit is an impractical in very low population density areas. Would you really task a bus driver to drive though my area every 30 min to pickup 1 passenger per day? Self driving on demand public/private transportation would be exponentially more efficient and useful. If I need a ride to the airport (3h away) on a Tuesday at 3am, I can request a self driving care to come pick me up and take me. Note, no uber/lyft here now either
@jb510 And you can request a taxi with a driver.
Automated driving does change anything.
(BTW: In many places taxis are part of public transport in such rural areas with taxis as busses on demand. In Germany it is called Anrufsammeltaxi, roughly "collective taxi on demand".)
At an airport likely there is more than one passenger every 30 min. However, your examples become more and more absurd.
@jb510 @RA_Negm Given that the original toot was about building infrastructure specifically for self-driving cars, the remote location argument doesn't really fly. It'd definitely be more expensive to rebuild and maintain all your rural roads as self-drive arteries than to improve public transport - or even rely on human-driven hire vehicles for your rarer trips, if demand is so low. The saving on paying an occasional driver just wouldn't cover the cost.
@outeast @RA_Negm all the “self driving infrastructure” proposals I’ve seen are overlaid on the existing road network. It’s not rebuilding, it’s augmenting to be friendlier to self driving cars. Most of it is communication. Communicating to cars signal status, communicating to cars lane configurations, construction changes, etc… the original toot equating it to laying train tracks seemed obviously hyperbole.
Rep Rap Ryn :3@reprapryn That's true. But not the taxi drivers are the problem, these people are.
And this is still not solved by driverless-cars.
Gracjan Nowak@RA_Negm They could help some disabled people who cannot drive to be more independent, for example blind people.
They’d also mitigate some human-related dangers like drunk driving.
That said, I don’t think they should be the primary solution. They can be a supplement, but we mostly need better public transit plus pedestrian and biking infrastructure.
@gracjan Humans as drivers can do this, too.
You have drunk drivers, because dunk persons want to drive themselves. Otherwise they would choose a taxi. They don't, because they believe that they can drive.
Automatic testing before driving yould solve this problem.
Aphrodite (recharging)as an aside i miss the trans am totem
My camera shoots fascistsMy version of this joke is that self-driving trucks would benefit by linking together for long-hauls and would be even more efficient if there were dedicated lanes...call them tracks...for them.
The sinister side of the special lanes for AVs is that it would be a way to force the technology on everyone. Fast, maybe toll-free lanes and free parking for AVs and slow, pothole strewn roads for the rest of us?
This instead of a functional transit system that works for everyone.
HistoPol (#HP) 🏴 🇺🇸 🏴
P McTigue@GreenSky
Maybe if we call them self driving lanes we could get more public funding for them.
Maybe if we call them self driving lanes we could get more public funding for them.
Graham Perks@GreenSky not quite – I have no train that stops anywhere near my home, let alone my driveway for convenient grocery unloading
Chris Godwin 
@GreenSky I can't roll a blunt and light it on a train, I need a Jetsons mobile that's not a train
teknomunk 
@GreenSky
> trains
Yes and no.
Cars and trains have very different modes of operation. With a train, a group of train cars travel according to a pre-determined schedule. Cars are ad hoc. People get in a car and go without having to wait. Each car nominally has its own schedule.
I think the best way to handle "self driving" vehicles is to put them on a separate right of way designed to allow allow individual cars to leave and enter without waiting for a schedule. Free flowing traffic like roads, but with separate right-of-way from human-driven cars.
Have electric driven be a requirement to use them and vehicle drive trains will all change to pure or hybrid electric without needing a government dictate.
> trains
Yes and no.
Cars and trains have very different modes of operation. With a train, a group of train cars travel according to a pre-determined schedule. Cars are ad hoc. People get in a car and go without having to wait. Each car nominally has its own schedule.
I think the best way to handle "self driving" vehicles is to put them on a separate right of way designed to allow allow individual cars to leave and enter without waiting for a schedule. Free flowing traffic like roads, but with separate right-of-way from human-driven cars.
Have electric driven be a requirement to use them and vehicle drive trains will all change to pure or hybrid electric without needing a government dictate.
William Bourgeois
Glitch (over count 1999)@GreenSky "Cars were invented because a lot of people wanted to go somewhere, but not with each other. This in turn led to a lot of other inventions such as traffic jams, most of which would make people miserable. This led to a lot of yellow post-it notes being written down to try and solve the problem, which is a bit weird because the post-it notes weren't why people were miserable."
~ Douglas Adams, The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy (paraphrased)
~ Douglas Adams, The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy (paraphrased)
Nande
std::polar@GreenSky I can't help but notice the pile-up in the background. (Or were they pile-driving?)
Kevin Boyd (he/him) 🇨🇦@GreenSky @sehe at first I thought it was photoshopped, but nope - real thing: https://www.insidevancouver.ca/2015/04/04/giant-totem-pole-made-of-stacked-cars-goes-up-in-vancouver/
Psychic Avocado@GreenSky I see you see the thing I see
Steven Barnhart
Falling_stone@GreenSky he's so embarrassing
Nafiul Islam@GreenSky to be fair, that’s a snarky comment. Roads would need to be painted for self driving cars. Trains need tracks.
Enkiusz🇺🇦@GreenSky As Adam Something from YT says: "Most transportation "innovation" currently is trying to reinvent trains. Poorly"
Michela Marie 🇨🇦@GreenSky haha. That’s the metro Vancouver Skytrain! It is indeed driverless. 😄
Der Entgegner (Aka Ratatöskr)@GreenSky *binary screeching*
ack!
ack!
George Reese@GreenSky There's going to be several phases to true self driving. We are at the end of the first phase, though Musk doesn't seem to realize it. That first phase is where we work to get cars to see the roads like humans. The next phase is where the roads talk to the cars. Then, after that, where the roads and cars are all in constant contact with one another. Only then will there be true self-driving cars.
Grandpa Don@GreenSky
there is absolutly no justification for self-driving cars. None. Nada. Traffic is too chaotic and unpredictable to put lives other than that of the idiot who wants to sit there and play Russian Roulette at risk unnecessarily. Smart cars, sure. Ours warns, applies brakes, stays in lane, etc. But no "hands off/eyes closed" option. JHC, it is as absurd as planning Mars colonization. Public transit and rideshare can get far better.
WTF is WRONG with people?