this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2024
89 points (91.6% liked)
[Dormant] Electric Vehicles
3201 readers
1 users here now
We have moved to:
A community for the sharing of links, news, and discussion related to Electric Vehicles.
Rules
- No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, casteism, speciesism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
- Be respectful, especially when disagreeing. Everyone should feel welcome here.
- No self-promotion.
- No irrelevant content. All posts must be relevant and related to plug-in electric vehicles — BEVs or PHEVs.
- No trolling.
- Policy, not politics. Submissions and comments about effective policymaking are allowed and encouraged in the community, however conversations and submissions about parties, politicians, and those devolving into general tribalism will be removed.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The author completely misses the point. It's not supposed to reduce traffic. It's supposed to make transport safe and more accessible. To reduce unnecessary costs of production. To reduce waste. To take back space allocated to parking lots. To reduce airborne emissions.
It only has 2 seats because cars are only occupied by more than 2 people like 10% of the time. Its also a highly-efficient design. The robotaxi is only the first step. That's why the Robovan can seat 20 people.
Would I prefer public transit? Absolutely. But who's paying for that? I think it's very clear that people are not voting for that in many places, so it's not realistic.
I think the biggest problem is that it's still only a concept with no realistic plan for implementation. Waymo has been on the roads where I live for years troubleshooting their self-driving concept. They've gotten better, but still cause problems regularly, like running red lights, stopping unpredictably, and getting stuck and not being able to figure out how to proceed. And Waymo seems significantly ahead of Tesla with this concept
It's going to do neither of these things either. Claims that it would are kind of insane. More traffic means more time at risk and more cost when it comes to cabs.
Butt one of the biggest use for cars is going to the airport with luggage and/or going out with friends on evenings to get drunk.. neither of which this is suited for.
So while the author "missed the point", your evaluation of use cases for this greatly misses the point too.
How do you figure that?
Don't know how you figure any of that either. It has an enormous amount of storage. And this could theoretically be not just a taxi but a replacement for your car altogether.
Most accidents occur at low speeds. More traffic, lower speeds.
Most people don't travel alone but in groups of 3 or more.
Most serious injury/death happens at higher speeds. Lower speeds, increased safety.
They also happen due to distracted drivers, which is not a problem for computers.
They absolutely do not.
76% of commuters drive alone
No, safety had more to it than less deaths. If we have less deaths but many many more crippling injuries, that's not better.
Congested and slow traffic seems to confuse self driving the most tbh.
Commuters don't take cabs. We're talking about cabs.