• PowerCrazy
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    8 months ago

    But ultimately the problem with self-driving cars is that they are trying to solve a problem (get people from point a to point b without having to own a car) that has been solved cheaper, before cars existed. It’s a computational dead-end, and the end state of self driving cars will look exactly like a train.

    • Ottomateeverything@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      If you’re anti-car, you’re anti-car. But that doesn’t mean that cars don’t solve slightly different variations of similar problems in different ways. Especially since some of the biggest downsides of cars would be eliminated by AI car fleets. Even without those solutions, cars still have a place in modern life whether you like it or not.

      And it’s not computationally a dead end. Like, at all. See above.

      • PowerCrazy
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        8 months ago

        AI Fleets don’t solve the massive space problems that roads take up and the forced sprawl that is required to accommodate bigger and bigger vehicles.

        Cars are fun, I love cars. Cars have no place in the day to day life of a human centric city. Anything a car can do can be accomplished more efficiently and faster by non-car transportation.

        • Ottomateeverything@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          AI Fleets don’t solve the massive space problems that roads take up and the forced sprawl that is required to accommodate bigger and bigger vehicles.

          They most certainly do. If everyone can just freely hail an autonomous vehicle from a stack sitting outside the place they just left, they don’t all need to bring their own cars into said area. This saves substantially on parking which is far and away the biggest impact on said “sprawl”.

          And there’s no reason those vehicles need to be big either. So that solves your other problem too.

          Anything a car can do can be accomplished more efficiently and faster by non-car transportation.

          This is almost entirely false. Cars end up “losing” because of problems like the above, such as parking, and many of those are just removed by autonomous vehicles.

          • PowerCrazy
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            8 months ago

            TIL, a fleet of idling AI vehicles outside of a massive public venue like a Stadium takes up no space. You must be an urban planner.

            • Ottomateeverything@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              The point is you don’t need nearly as many cars when they’re rented as needed as opposed to one for every person in the space.

              Come now, you can’t actually be that dense.

              • PowerCrazy
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                8 months ago

                You also don’t need nearly as many cars if you build public transit infrastructure with tech that exists today, using methods that have existed for over 100 years. Surely you can’t be that dense.