this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2025
1641 points (99.2% liked)
Fuck Cars
12437 readers
558 users here now
A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!
Rules
1. Be Civil
You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.
2. No hate speech
Don't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.
3. Don't harass people
Don't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.
4. Stay on topic
This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.
5. No reposts
Do not repost content that has already been posted in this community.
Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.
Posting Guidelines
In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:
- [meta] for discussions/suggestions about this community itself
- [article] for news articles
- [blog] for any blog-style content
- [video] for video resources
- [academic] for academic studies and sources
- [discussion] for text post questions, rants, and/or discussions
- [meme] for memes
- [image] for any non-meme images
- [misc] for anything that doesn’t fall cleanly into any of the other categories
Recommended communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The issue with the self-driving-cab concept, as a cure to car infrastructure, is it doesn't really fix the problem. Sure, maybe parking becomes less of an issue, but not roads. If anything they are worse. Not only is it still one person per car (usually), it also now has to drive around empty to pick up new passengers. At least a personal car never occupies or damages road infrastructure when it isn't in use.
Busses are a legitimate solution for shorter distance travel that reduce infrastructure requirements. You can fit potentially dozens of people in a single vehicle, and they can be made to get you almost anywhere you need, with only a short walk required.
If it's picking up new passengers, that means it isn't sitting around parked for 8 hours.
Additionally, how much time is spent looking for parking? How much time is spent disrupting traffic while trying to parallel park?
While it's true that a car might end up driving around empty for a certain amount of time, it's only doing that in the short space needed to get to the next passenger. The empty trips will be much shorter than the trips with a passenger onboard. And, every time that happens it saves 2 parking spots. One for the passenger it just dropped off, and one for the passenger it's currently picking up.
You live in a place without on-street parking?
Yes, it saves parking, but why would we choose this over busses?! That's the argument. Busses do essentially everything self-driving taxis do, with none of the negatives, and the positives are even better.
Self-driving taxis are car companies trying to make you stop advocating for better solutions that lose them money. That's it. Stop doing their work for them. Push for public trains and busses, and not for corporate owned shitty self-driving taxis that don't benefit anyone except shoveling money into a few rich people's pockets.
Because you have to walk to a bus stop, which in some areas can be a 15 minute walk. Then you have to wait for a bus, which in some areas can be a 30-60 minute wait.
Except come to your exact location and come on demand.
The biggest self-driving taxi company isn't a car company, it's Google.
It's not it.
I'm not. You're as unaware of the self-driving car space as you are about spelling your favourite alternative: it's "buses" not "busses".
Yes, those are great too, but there will always be a demand for vehicles that go directly to your doorstop and come on demand. In less dense areas a bus will never be able to compete with that. So, you can push for both.
Who do you think is getting rich off self-driving cars?
Sure, and autonomous taxis don't exist at all almost anywhere. We're talking about fixing problems. Those problems you listed are fixable. There's no need to introduce something so obtuse to avoid fixing them with a worse solution.
When done well, it should be pretty close every five minutes or so. You can handle that I think. The driverless taxi doesn't literally put you in the car, so I guess we need a better solution. (/s)
I never said they were. First, where do they get the cars? Another company is making money from the sales (and ongoing maintenance and parts). Also, promoting a reliance on car infrastructure, which these do, benefits car companies.
First, I'm not unaware of it. I've been paying attention to it for as long as people have been working on it. Second, https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/plural-of-bus. I guess you're the one unaware. If you're going to be a pedantic ass, at least have the courtesy of being correct.
We have those. They're called bikes. They cost a lot less, cause less traffic, pollute less, don't take up much parking space, cost almost nothing to use, can get to more places, and they make you healthier as a bonus.
Why would these huge companies be doing it if they don't expect to make incredible profits off of it? Do you see Google just doing things out of good will? Hell no. They expect to make stupid amounts of money with it, and likely fuck over public option while they're at it. If they can sell cities on letting them operate, kick back some cash, and trash public infrastructure, they're going to do it.