• Rentlar@lemmy.caOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    This video arrives well in the context of Ontario’s Premier Ford pushing stupid ideas like removing bike lanes would improve traffic. Autonomous roads are car and car-subscription selling policy, not a safety policy. In the US, considering some billionaire auto industry technocrat is likely to get a high position in the upcoming government, hold onto your butts for more insanity along these lines. It’s up to communities to defend and improve infrastructure in their cities.

    • yonder@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      Or maybe Ontarians should see the terrible choices Doug has made and elect a better premiere, but that seems liketoo much to ask for given how he’s already been reelected once.

    • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      Autonomous vehicles - very much unlike the Tesla snake oil - are not geared towards ownership, and would actually reduce road usage while increasing safety.

      • Rentlar@lemmy.caOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I thought so too originally, but the linked video shows a few reasons why it wouldn’t. Autonomous cars have the same space inefficiency per passenger (in some cases worse) as driven cars. They still need a place to charge, but that can’t be only in non-congested areas because people wouldn’t want to stand around waiting 12 minutes for their pickup. If they don’t use parking they’d spend their day roaming around, causing traffic like 24/7 taxi drivers waiting for an order except taking up road space.

        And watch with Elon Musk in government and schedule F employees, safety will be the nth priority behind profits for Tesla.

      • n2burns@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        16 hours ago

        As the video points out, what you’re describing is very similar to what was said about Uber & Lyft. At first glance, a cheaper, more available taxi service seems like it should reduce road usage. However, that assumes car trips are replaced by rideshare trips. In actuality, when Uber & Lyft have entered a market, it has resulted in increased road usage. This is because of induced demand, and if rideshares are replacing another form of transportation, it’s usually public transit, walking, or biking, not driving.

          • n2burns@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Taxis existed before Uber and Lyft. What’s being touted is that AVs will be cheaper and more available than ridesharing, the same way ridingsharing was to taxis.

            • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              No, the difference was that you could summon an Uber from an app, and it would actually show up.

      • yonder@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Please watch the video as it provides reasons as to why autonomous cars will reduce safety and increase road usage. I could however see autonomous vehicules being useful for long-haul cargo transport, though trains might be a better choice.