Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Living Car Free
Reload this Page >

Driverless cars' effect on LCF

Notices
Living Car Free Do you live car free or car light? Do you prefer to use alternative transportation (bicycles, walking, other human-powered or public transportation) for everyday activities whenever possible? Discuss your lifestyle here.

Driverless cars' effect on LCF

Old 01-27-18, 08:55 AM
  #51  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,453

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7628 Post(s)
Liked 3,453 Times in 1,823 Posts
It is easy to imagine scenatrios where traffic would increase .... and equally easy to imagine scenarios where it would be reduced. I just won't bother, because some peple live in bubbles with walls so thick, nothing penetrates.

One thing pretty much every rational and honest person realizes and rp[edicts is that when there are more driverless cars, traffic will travel more smoothly.

Anyone who had seen the huge snarl-ups at every exit on a highway because humans are too stupid to cooperate for a high=-speed merge understands this completely and immediately.
Maelochs is offline  
Old 01-27-18, 10:04 AM
  #52  
cooker
Prefers Cicero
 
cooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,870

Bikes: 1984 Trek 520; 2007 Bike Friday NWT; misc others

Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3939 Post(s)
Liked 112 Times in 87 Posts
Originally Posted by Maelochs
One thing pretty much every rational and honest person realizes and rp[edicts is that when there are more driverless cars, traffic will travel more smoothly
Yes and no. The cars themselves may be better at following closely and merging while maintaining constant speed, and using alternate routes to avoid local congestion, but if a subset of people now use subways into town because they hate driving, or avoid crowded malls because parking is a nightmare, they might go by driverless car more often in the future because the car will take on the stress, so it might get more congested. I-Like-To-Bike posted a link showing Uber pickups and dropoffs have led to curbside congestion in some places, so presumably cheaper, driverless Uber might be even worse.

Last edited by cooker; 01-27-18 at 10:09 AM.
cooker is offline  
Old 01-27-18, 12:04 PM
  #53  
tandempower
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8084 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by CliffordK
One could imagine once the technology comes to fruition, your Riderless car could be quite busy indeed, racking up more miles than the average Soccer Mom today. Oh, that reminds me.... don't forget to send the drone to soccer practice.... you wouldn't want the kids to think you're ignoring them would you?

I can't imagine anybody complaining about a couple extra trips without passengers. Of course, there are those lines at the deli drive-up of all those riderless cars picking up the kids lunches. But, it wouldn't do to not have it fresh. Perhaps it would be safer just to send the car to the deli midday before the kids lunch hour

I suppose it would be more efficient to just buy a driverless car for every family member, but you're saving so much by just sending the one family car around town in riderless mode.
For LCF, the only benefit of driverless cars is to reduce land-waste on parking lots and pavements so that destinations will be closer together and thus easier to walk/bike between. Obviously we are stuck in a situation where no one wants to give up driving because it is inconvenient to LCF, so infrastructure continues to be maintained for the sake of driving convenience where ubiquitous driving is assumed. Driverless cars have the potential to reduce the number of cars per capita if they are used properly, but obviously the problem happens when people insist that they have the right to use them in whatever way they please and how dare anyone tell them that their way is 'incorrect?!?!'
tandempower is offline  
Old 01-27-18, 12:08 PM
  #54  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,453

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7628 Post(s)
Liked 3,453 Times in 1,823 Posts
Originally Posted by cooker
Yes and no. The cars themselves may be better at following closely and merging while maintaining constant speed, and using alternate routes to avoid local congestion, but if a subset of people now use subways into town because they hate driving, or avoid crowded malls because parking is a nightmare, they might go by driverless car more often in the future because the car will take on the stress, so it might get more congested. I-Like-To-Bike posted a link showing Uber pickups and dropoffs have led to curbside congestion in some places, so presumably cheaper, driverless Uber might be even worse.
yes, this is a concern. A lot will depend on cost, too. If it is cheap to operate a driverless car, some people might send them all over for no reason. Some of the stuff though ... like buying favorite cookies ... is the car going to go to the store, go into the store, pick up the cookies, and pay for them?

Seems a lot more likely that a small driverless car Operated By The Grocery Service will make neighborhood deliveries (or drones will---I mean, this is already happening in some places, it isn't a dream of the future--I have read articles about pilot programs) which will limit traffic somewhat.

Shopping will be done online, deliveries will be arranged by the stores via road-going or flying drones---people are Not eager to drive morte, and won't need to drive more, and the foolish fantasies about cars going shopping ... that is stuff invented by peple grasping at straws.

Hey, folks ... Everything is going to change. And the stuff that works will be kept and the stuff that doesn't will get axed. Same as it ever was.

Some people have no grasp of the passage of history. hundreds of years from now, we will be seen as living in the dawn of the automotive age. The first motorized carts from 1896 won't bee seen as a lot different form the latest Lexus with all the driver aids and all that.

Hundreds of years from now if there are cars they will All be robot-driven because obviously a computer can do it a Lot better than any human (we have been happy with 30-40 thousands highway deaths a year since about 1960 ... and almost all were driver error.) Pretty sure the internal combustion engine will have been long dead, and quite possibly everything will be maglev or some propulsion system we cannot even imagine.

And here we have to wade through people saying effectively, "The horse and buggy were too far advanced ... and since then everything has gotten worse!"

I can tell you this---if we every have anything approaching a "perfect World" it won't be because of the transportation modalities ... it will be because people decided to place emphasis on personal growth and development instead of material wealth and acquisition.

Nothing wrong with being rich, but rich and greedy is a bad combination. If people were honest, caring tolerant ... if "Virtue" became a word with a serious, not a comical meaning ... if "Being good' actually meant something, and "being rich," "being popular," "being famous" no longer excused the worst sort of human behavior ... then the rest of the crap would be easy to fix.
Maelochs is offline  
Old 01-27-18, 01:04 PM
  #55  
cooker
Prefers Cicero
 
cooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,870

Bikes: 1984 Trek 520; 2007 Bike Friday NWT; misc others

Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3939 Post(s)
Liked 112 Times in 87 Posts
Originally Posted by tandempower
For LCF, the only benefit of driverless cars is to reduce land-waste on parking lots and pavements so that destinations will be closer together and thus easier to walk/bike between. Obviously we are stuck in a situation where no one wants to give up driving because it is inconvenient to LCF, so infrastructure continues to be maintained for the sake of driving convenience where ubiquitous driving is assumed. Driverless cars have the potential to reduce the number of cars per capita if they are used properly, but obviously the problem happens when people insist that they have the right to use them in whatever way they please and how dare anyone tell them that their way is 'incorrect?!?!'
I don't see it as "correct" or "incorrect". Driving imposes some costs and possible harms on society (read: other people) and drivers should be accountable for a larger share of those costs, which will somewhat spur them to drive less.
cooker is offline  
Old 01-27-18, 02:36 PM
  #56  
CliffordK
Senior Member
 
CliffordK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Posts: 27,600
Mentioned: 217 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18320 Post(s)
Liked 4,489 Times in 3,338 Posts
Originally Posted by Maelochs
One thing pretty much every rational and honest person realizes and rp[edicts is that when there are more driverless cars, traffic will travel more smoothly.

Anyone who had seen the huge snarl-ups at every exit on a highway because humans are too stupid to cooperate for a high=-speed merge understands this completely and immediately.
It maybe inevitable that traffic will go to 100% driverless and drones, but it will be a long transition period that will likely extend beyond all of our lifetimes.

So for the next 50+ years, there will always be those few drivers on the road that aren't going driverless for one reason or another. We've had "hot rods" since the inception of automobiles. Are people going that up to ride in drones? And adding even a few drivers into the mix will mean all the drones will have to obey more or less the same rules as drivers obey today.

Will we be able to hot-rod our drones/driverless cars?

One could imagine vehicles going into train/convoy mode with vehicles driving inches from the bumper in front. Cooperatively allowing cars to peel out of the convoy, and merge in. Brake commands being instantly relayed to all vehicles in the convoy.

So, in theory, one could have perfect traffic flow... but that will also mean that software will have to be shared between the half dozen manufacturers, and everything will have to work together. What happens when that one drone on the road has a glich? Perhaps simply it is running an obsolete computer and chokes with a new upgrade?
CliffordK is offline  
Old 01-27-18, 06:15 PM
  #57  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,453

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7628 Post(s)
Liked 3,453 Times in 1,823 Posts
Originally Posted by CliffordK
Stuff ... but good stuff.
All good stuff.

But ... all the airplanes are made by different companies and they all work in all the air traffic systems anywhere in the world. And when an airplane messes up Everyone notices.

AI would have to be stupider than an amoeba to no t be able to manage traffic and reduce deaths from where we are now. Now ... people literally drive into the car ahead in stop-and-go traffic because they cannot keep focused for fifteen seconds.

hard Not to beat that.

As for the hot rodders .... Rush has a tune which I have never fully listened to called "Little Red Barchetta" about a guy in a 1950s Ferrari trying to illegally drive his own car, and then racing across the countryside trying to outrun the flying police drones.

But I expect people will give up driving pretty readily ... give them a computer game and a Facebook feed and a video channel and they won't remember they are in a car.

Also ... most driving for most people is a miserable battle with rush-hour traffic.

I cannot tell you (but you know already) what it is like to pedal past long lines of drivers absolutely hating life---sitting in the climate-controlled cocoon in a padded seat, with a favorite beverage, a sound system rivaling what have at home, scowling and cursing, while outside it is 105 degrees or 35 and raining---and I am loving life.

I absoutely expect cars to link up in perfect drafting trains, automatically cycling themselves out when it is time to exit because every car everywhere withing many miles will know where every other car is and where it is headed. Computers will constantly calculate speeds to minimize braking and acceleration and to save fule and resources and maximize traffic flow.

And for sure, every car will immediately recognize any car-sized object in the road and not responding to control signals and All the cars everywhere around will report it and the crane-drone will fly in and lift it out of traffic and fly it to the detention center where its occupants will remain.

One sec ... https://www.ntd.tv/2018/01/20/woman-c...etrieve-phone/ Everybody hated these two "Jane, you ignorant ***"s for delaying the journey home.

People will look at drivers driving their own cars the way we would look at people driving a car onto the subway tracks: "You are delaying us all and endangering us all. You are insane and stupid and deserve to be put down."

Last edited by Maelochs; 01-27-18 at 06:18 PM.
Maelochs is offline  
Old 01-27-18, 07:09 PM
  #58  
350htrr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Canada, PG BC
Posts: 3,849

Bikes: 27 speed ORYX with over 39,000Kms on it and another 14,000KMs with a BionX E-Assist on it

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1024 Post(s)
Liked 57 Times in 49 Posts
Originally Posted by Maelochs
All good stuff.

But ... all the airplanes are made by different companies and they all work in all the air traffic systems anywhere in the world. And when an airplane messes up Everyone notices.

AI would have to be stupider than an amoeba to no t be able to manage traffic and reduce deaths from where we are now. Now ... people literally drive into the car ahead in stop-and-go traffic because they cannot keep focused for fifteen seconds.

hard Not to beat that.

As for the hot rodders .... Rush has a tune which I have never fully listened to called "Little Red Barchetta" about a guy in a 1950s Ferrari trying to illegally drive his own car, and then racing across the countryside trying to outrun the flying police drones.

But I expect people will give up driving pretty readily ... give them a computer game and a Facebook feed and a video channel and they won't remember they are in a car.

Also ... most driving for most people is a miserable battle with rush-hour traffic.

I cannot tell you (but you know already) what it is like to pedal past long lines of drivers absolutely hating life---sitting in the climate-controlled cocoon in a padded seat, with a favorite beverage, a sound system rivaling what have at home, scowling and cursing, while outside it is 105 degrees or 35 and raining---and I am loving life.

I absoutely expect cars to link up in perfect drafting trains, automatically cycling themselves out when it is time to exit because every car everywhere withing many miles will know where every other car is and where it is headed. Computers will constantly calculate speeds to minimize braking and acceleration and to save fule and resources and maximize traffic flow.

And for sure, every car will immediately recognize any car-sized object in the road and not responding to control signals and All the cars everywhere around will report it and the crane-drone will fly in and lift it out of traffic and fly it to the detention center where its occupants will remain.

One sec ... Woman Creates Rush-Hour Nightmare, Shutting Down Subway to Retrieve Phone | NTD.TV Everybody hated these two "Jane, you ignorant ***"s for delaying the journey home.

People will look at drivers driving their own cars the way we would look at people driving a car onto the subway tracks: "You are delaying us all and endangering us all. You are insane and stupid and deserve to be put down."
That, IS what will/would happen, practically overnight... IMO
350htrr is offline  
Old 01-28-18, 01:40 AM
  #59  
CliffordK
Senior Member
 
CliffordK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Posts: 27,600
Mentioned: 217 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18320 Post(s)
Liked 4,489 Times in 3,338 Posts
Originally Posted by Maelochs
All good stuff.

But ... all the airplanes are made by different companies and they all work in all the air traffic systems anywhere in the world. And when an airplane messes up Everyone notices.
Well, they work reasonably well... except when they miss the handoff somewhere between Malaysia and China... and then nobody can figure out where the heck the jet ended up.

Originally Posted by Maelochs
As for the hot rodders .... Rush has a tune which I have never fully listened to called "Little Red Barchetta" about a guy in a 1950s Ferrari trying to illegally drive his own car, and then racing across the countryside trying to outrun the flying police drones.

But I expect people will give up driving pretty readily ... give them a computer game and a Facebook feed and a video channel and they won't remember they are in a car.

...

I absoutely expect cars to link up in perfect drafting trains, automatically cycling themselves out when it is time to exit because every car everywhere withing many miles will know where every other car is and where it is headed. Computers will constantly calculate speeds to minimize braking and acceleration and to save fule and resources and maximize traffic flow.
We have the technology to microchip everyone in the world. No more need for visas, drivers licenses, passports, keys, subway fees, etc. Just scan the microchip, and be on your way.

Heck, we even microchip our dogs... (so the dog pound can catch the dog owners).

Yet, a good chunk of the population has decided that would be the ultimate evil to chip the population (which no doubt would have already been hacked and we'd be implanting chip 2.0 and chip 3.0 by now).

So... you don't think there will be at least a few people driving their F-350 pickups with gun racks behind the seat that just won't go for this whole track everyone everywhere thing?

And, if a BMW can't figure out how to safely pass a bicycle on the road... surely those F-350 drivers will have figured out how to save a few seconds on their commute, pushing through roads that Johnny Cab won't go on, gunning through a few stale yellows, etc.

Actually, if auto-driving comes to pass, then traffic lights would be unnecessary... more or less.

The other thing we'll have to come to grips with is whether the vehicles should have both manual and auto mode. Again, back to the pickups, there is a fair amount of driving around the farm that just won't be convenient to pre-program in. It might be nice to set the pickup on autopilot when one is loading hay, but that may well be on the bottom of the list for the Google programmers. But, cutting across the hay field trying not to dump too many bales... hitting that ditch just right? Off-Roading... Will we see Johnny Cab Monster Trucks?
CliffordK is offline  
Old 01-28-18, 04:29 AM
  #60  
Walter S
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Atlanta, GA. USA
Posts: 3,804

Bikes: Surly Long Haul Disc Trucker

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1015 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by CliffordK
The other thing we'll have to come to grips with is whether the vehicles should have both manual and auto mode. Again, back to the pickups, there is a fair amount of driving around the farm that just won't be convenient to pre-program in. It might be nice to set the pickup on autopilot when one is loading hay, but that may well be on the bottom of the list for the Google programmers. But, cutting across the hay field trying not to dump too many bales... hitting that ditch just right? Off-Roading... Will we see Johnny Cab Monster Trucks?
Most talk about driverless ignores the reality of rural life, where quite often you need to at least briefly "drive" on something that is by no means a "road". Or things like a place that needs to be avoided on your private road after a rain, lest the car get stuck etc.
Walter S is offline  
Old 01-28-18, 05:52 AM
  #61  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,453

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7628 Post(s)
Liked 3,453 Times in 1,823 Posts
As I keep saying ... (maybe no one is listening) .... we have gone from eating raw meat, roots, and insects, to walking on the freaking MOON .... Yes, there are a Lot of situations which will make advancing AI cars more complicated.

Do you think the first people who bought bicycles and realized how few roads there were just quit? No, they got roads built ... which is why cars suddenly became practical.

Seriously, how vast was the shift from riding on the backs of animals to traveling on independent motorized vehicles? When roads were often impassible for wagons, let alone cars?

People keep coming up with pebbles on the path and saying "Let's see you climb This mountain."

We Drove a Car On the Moon. So, obviously, there is no way to solve any technical problem with AI cars. Just cannot be done.
Maelochs is offline  
Old 01-28-18, 06:06 AM
  #62  
CliffordK
Senior Member
 
CliffordK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Posts: 27,600
Mentioned: 217 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18320 Post(s)
Liked 4,489 Times in 3,338 Posts
Good point on how quickly technology has been changing. It wasn't long ago that all phones had to be plugged into the wall. And, then not long before that when one had "party lines". Pick up the phone, and if someone else was talking, hang up and wait a bit. I wonder how many teenagers today could imagine not only having to share their phones with the whole family, but also sharing their phones with the neighbors (who could also listen in if they were so inclined). And, only being able to pull the phone to the end of the wire.

Things will change with cars... not overnight, but soon enough.

As far as roads... Inner city Italian roads are great.

Cities were built small and compact for many reasons, including being easier to defend and build walls around. Roads were never straight, and never wide enough. And the Italians never quite figured out one-way roads (at least when I was there), so there would always be cars going in different directions on roads barely wide enough for a smart car (or a Fiat 500/126 at the time)... but often with a car going one direction and a small truck going the other direction.

They had sidewalks... which were more for parking than walking

Perhaps technology will at least tell them not to enter a narrow street when a car is coming around the corner from the opposite direction.

But, then again, what would an Italian be without a horn, and a few choice words?

Anyway, I wonder if the roads were designed more for walking and handcarts... and then cars took over.
CliffordK is offline  
Old 01-28-18, 06:16 AM
  #63  
Walter S
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Atlanta, GA. USA
Posts: 3,804

Bikes: Surly Long Haul Disc Trucker

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1015 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by Maelochs
We Drove a Car On the Moon. So, obviously, there is no way to solve any technical problem with AI cars. Just cannot be done.
A common fallacy in human reasoning is to assume that if we can do certain things that seem amazing by standards of the past, that we'll ultimately do all of the seemingly impossible things we face with ease. It just doesn't work that way. Some things that may have been difficult in the past nevertheless have relatively simple solutions once they are uncovered. Other problems just don't have a reasonable solution to be found and will never be solved. All problems have to be addressed in terms of their unique characteristics rather than just point to other things we've done that originally seemed difficult.

The fact is that driving cars on the moon did not even require a computer at all, much less AI capable of a reasonable response to a large variety of conditions and the sensors necessary to accurately model the environment. The cars we drove on the moon were not particularly complex to develop. The hard part was getting them there, not driving them.
Walter S is offline  
Old 01-28-18, 11:39 AM
  #64  
jon c. 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 4,812
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1591 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1,015 Times in 570 Posts
Originally Posted by Walter S
A common fallacy in human reasoning is to assume that if we can do certain things that seem amazing by standards of the past, that we'll ultimately do all of the seemingly impossible things we face with ease. It just doesn't work that way. ...
The cars we drove on the moon were not particularly complex to develop. The hard part was getting them there, not driving them.
But we did get them there. Which is somewhat the point of the analogy. I would agree of course that not all achievements and advancements are analogous, but within similar technological realms the great forward leaps in the past can be seen as foreshadowing what will be possible in the future.

What is amazing by standards of the past and what is seemingly impossible are two very different things. AVs may indeed seem amazing by standards of the past, but they are not in this day and age seemingly impossible. They are not only possible but already in in existence. In this case technological advances in the past are indeed instructive regarding what we might reasonably expect for improvements in this extant technology.
jon c. is offline  
Old 01-28-18, 11:42 AM
  #65  
tandempower
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8084 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by cooker
I don't see it as "correct" or "incorrect". Driving imposes some costs and possible harms on society (read: other people) and drivers should be accountable for a larger share of those costs, which will somewhat spur them to drive less.
Idk how P&R this topic would be considered within an LCF thread, but when you say that there are costs that people should be accountable for, without also saying that they should reduce the thing that is causing the costs, you're basically saying that it's ok to pay to pollute if you want to. Paying to pollute might work for something like littering, where there are people happy to take your money to clean up after you, but in the bigger picture of land-use, sprawl, environment/climate, etc. there's no solution that can be bought because the solution involves calming, not exciting, economic activity.
tandempower is offline  
Old 01-28-18, 06:00 PM
  #66  
Rollfast
What happened?
 
Rollfast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Around here somewhere
Posts: 8,050

Bikes: 3 Rollfasts, 3 Schwinns, a Shelby and a Higgins Flightliner in a pear tree!

Mentioned: 57 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1835 Post(s)
Liked 292 Times in 255 Posts
The answer is: Driverless cars are cars, therefore, by the definition of this court, there is no LCF.




__________________
I don't know nothing, and I memorized it in school and got this here paper I'm proud of to show it.
Rollfast is offline  
Old 01-28-18, 06:09 PM
  #67  
tandempower
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8084 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by Rollfast
The answer is: Driverless cars are cars, therefore, by the definition of this court, there is no LCF.
But driverless cars will likely change the way people/passengers interact with destinations, which could translate into more convenience for LCF as well, e.g. less parking lots and more destinations closer to each other. Also better sidewalks and bike paths for people to use when they aren't riding in the car.
tandempower is offline  
Old 01-28-18, 06:16 PM
  #68  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,453

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7628 Post(s)
Liked 3,453 Times in 1,823 Posts
i simply do not see any change in the popularity of transport cycling unless towns and cities are completely redesigned ... except for e-bikes.

All it would take is a person who was considering it to read about having to wring ones socks out four times during the day, and that person would choose the car.
Maelochs is offline  
Old 01-28-18, 06:55 PM
  #69  
Rollfast
What happened?
 
Rollfast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Around here somewhere
Posts: 8,050

Bikes: 3 Rollfasts, 3 Schwinns, a Shelby and a Higgins Flightliner in a pear tree!

Mentioned: 57 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1835 Post(s)
Liked 292 Times in 255 Posts
Originally Posted by tandempower
But driverless cars will likely change the way people/passengers interact with destinations, which could translate into more convenience for LCF as well, e.g. less parking lots and more destinations closer to each other. Also better sidewalks and bike paths for people to use when they aren't riding in the car.

IF you are going to tear my city down and start over. Checkmate.
__________________
I don't know nothing, and I memorized it in school and got this here paper I'm proud of to show it.
Rollfast is offline  
Old 01-28-18, 07:02 PM
  #70  
tandempower
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8084 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by Rollfast
IF you are going to tear my city down and start over. Checkmate.
Cities are evolving all the time by the way properties are being renovated and redeveloped.
tandempower is offline  
Old 01-28-18, 08:07 PM
  #71  
Mobile 155
Senior Member
 
Mobile 155's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Dallas Fort Worth Metroplex
Posts: 5,058

Bikes: 2013 Haro FL Comp 29er MTB.

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1470 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 45 Times in 35 Posts
Originally Posted by Rollfast
IF you are going to tear my city down and start over. Checkmate.
I wouldn't worry much. The corporations are placing their resources into self driving cars and they aren't interested in financing any competition. The cities and counties and state tend to cater to the voters interest and most of them don't seem all that interested because there isn't as much money in it. The came committees that decide where to plant trees and where to have parks and if you can live in the same zone where they have factories are still in charge and that isn't in a lot of danger of changing.

In the little community I live in about two or three years ago some of us petitioned the city to put in a bike lane, simple painted one for about 3 miles in the center of town. The store keepers threw a fit and because they were a big part of the tax base they got their way. Cannot disrupt on street parking.

This year the state has decided we need a center divider consisting of a raised island through 6 miles of the same area. The reasoning is because of Jay walking and wanting a safety zone. Hard on bikes because unless you can bunny hop you can only turn at an intersection. Same people complained but this time the state informed us that it didn't matter. We may have named the street but in fact it is a state highway connecting four cities and as such it's design is subject to state engineers. And we have seen Google cars mapping our highway. I haven't seen Google Bike yet.
Mobile 155 is offline  
Old 01-29-18, 01:26 AM
  #72  
Roody
Sophomoric Member
 
Roody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dancing in Lansing
Posts: 24,221
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 711 Post(s)
Liked 13 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by Mobile 155
I have noticed a concern by some that the new automated cars might be too expensive? I am not sure that is a real legitimate concern. Sure if the cars you are looking at are 20 to 35k a car like a Tesla may seem expensive. Then if you consider a new Ford, Chevy or Dodge 4x4 Pickup can easily cost 60K or more with all of the back up cameras, sound system, built in cell phone, voice activated radio and heated seats today. So it wouldn't be too out of line for someone to spend 50k for a self driving car of their own.

If companies would pop up for services that provided on demand car service they would surely be given fleet discounts. Their per unit cost would be less than the private fleet I would think. The longevity of each unit could reduce the cost as well, assuming they were well built. Accidents or the lack there of would reduce the medical cost to society as well.

Just as a thought they could easily be considered transit for the masses and given a share of the funding given to buses. That would reduce the cost of a ride to the point where they could be very competitive with multi person station to station transport.

With automation there is no reason for the city bus to be the benchmark of how people are served by transportation. Automated buses might give that form of mass transit a few extra years of life but if they ever come up with a system that provides the same level of service as the private auto or even the old horse and buggy I believe people would jump on the idea.

I once believe a sea cruise was too expensive for a vacation. But over the years they have been in my reach more than once and opened up a whole new experience of travel both domestic and internationally. It is a matter of perspective and a healthy economy I believe. That and what people consider important.
The do-over cost is going to be astronomical. Not only R&D but legal costs, co-ordination between the many companies that are developing autonomous vehicles, and even the mapping that will be required. Hell, the costs of implementing cellular service that supports them is mind-boggling. Even G5 service will probably be inadequate for serving these systems that will have to communicate with each other. It might take G6 or G7 before we can swithch.
__________________

"Think Outside the Cage"
Roody is offline  
Old 01-29-18, 07:16 AM
  #73  
tandempower
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8084 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by Mobile 155
This year the state has decided we need a center divider consisting of a raised island through 6 miles of the same area. The reasoning is because of Jay walking and wanting a safety zone. Hard on bikes because unless you can bunny hop you can only turn at an intersection.
Why won't the safety zone work for bikes? Is the traffic flow so constant that you don't have time to get off the bike and lift it up onto the island?
tandempower is offline  
Old 01-30-18, 12:32 PM
  #74  
Walter S
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Atlanta, GA. USA
Posts: 3,804

Bikes: Surly Long Haul Disc Trucker

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1015 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by Roody
The do-over cost is going to be astronomical. Not only R&D but legal costs, co-ordination between the many companies that are developing autonomous vehicles, and even the mapping that will be required. Hell, the costs of implementing cellular service that supports them is mind-boggling. Even G5 service will probably be inadequate for serving these systems that will have to communicate with each other. It might take G6 or G7 before we can swithch.
That will not be necessary 100% of the time. It will smooth the flow of traffic. Not necessary for accident avoidance. And the specific means of intercommunication is not a settled mater and will almost certainly not involve the cell network. The information exchange is only to other cars within a few hundred meters. And it needs to be WAY faster than a cell phone can place a call. And “who” would the car call??
Walter S is offline  
Old 01-30-18, 01:57 PM
  #75  
Mobile 155
Senior Member
 
Mobile 155's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Dallas Fort Worth Metroplex
Posts: 5,058

Bikes: 2013 Haro FL Comp 29er MTB.

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1470 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 45 Times in 35 Posts
Originally Posted by Walter S
That will not be necessary 100% of the time. It will smooth the flow of traffic. Not necessary for accident avoidance. And the specific means of intercommunication is not a settled mater and will almost certainly not involve the cell network. The information exchange is only to other cars within a few hundred meters. And it needs to be WAY faster than a cell phone can place a call. And “who” would the car call??
Right now today my Garmin tracks my progress while cycling or walking way faster that a cell phone. Right now today a device the size of silver dollar can extrapolate my route after losing one to three of the satellites sending information to that device. A computer in a car will have a lot more AI than my cycling hiking computer. Plus if I go to Strava I can track any of my friends to see if they were on the same route as I rode or walked or when no matter what part of the day I am researching. We could be closer than many believe.

In sports cycling the old saying of “Pictures or it didn’t happen.” Has changed to,”Strava or it didn’t happen.” For those times when someone brags about how far or how fast they ride.
Mobile 155 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.