
Driving – An extinction event - awjr
https://trafficwmp.wordpress.com/2017/02/10/driving-an-extinction-event/amp/
======
spunker540
I'm mostly tired of reading all the self-driving hype by now- I know it's
coming and its gonna be great. But I had never thought about the ramifications
for police forces before! I think a decent amount of government revenue will
be lost and not as many officers required nationwide. Most people's only
crimes end up being driving-related. And many arrests start with being pulled
over too- dui's, drug possession, outstanding warrant etc.

~~~
xapata
Many people don't realize how much of government has been crafted to support
the automobile industry, effectively a subsidy. The obvious one is building
roads, but we should also consider how laws have taken rights away from
pedestrians and pedestrian-friendly builders. For example, many cities won't
allow a new building without a parking lot moat.

~~~
marcc
I think we should start removing those regulations that require large parking
lots for new construction. It's a little forward-thinking, but if the next
shopping center/strip mall/whatever was built only with pickup/dropoff spots
and not park-while-you-shop spots, that would both encourage people to ride
share today and also build for the future.

~~~
ghaff
It would most likely result in people simply avoiding the next shopping
center/strip mall/whatever because it's such a hassle to go there. Just as I
rarely go to downtown areas today where parking is a hassle.

~~~
calvano915
Las Vegas casinos have started charging for parking after decades of being
known for not doing so. This occurred after the newest large projects were
built without large/any parking to accommodate drivers visiting those
projects. I cannot speak for the impacts on locals visiting the Strip as this
is still a new thing, but I do know that:

\- The casinos are making an additional $7+/day from every vehicle parking on
their properties (those who haven't found a way to get free parking, including
being on a higher than lowest gaming tier).

\- MGM Resorts started the trend, and within months Wynn and Caesars followed
suit. The increased revenue in MGM's case was to fund an additional paid
parking garage.

\- All future projects will probably follow suit and limit the amount of
spaces.

Throughout all of this, the only big improvement in public transit discussed
has been some kind of rail option going down the Strip in the future.
Otherwise, it seems to be that locals will pay more by either paying to park
or using ride hailing/taxis. In other words, not necessarily moving us forward
in transit efficiency and additional revenue to the benefit of a few
companies.

~~~
ghaff
This caught me by surprise the last time I was in Vegas for an event although,
as it turned out, my rate included parking. I don't know enough about Las
Vegas dynamics to know all the rationale behind this. I do know that gaming
has dropped percentage-wise as a revenue source.

I imagine the impact on visitors isn't that great. I know I won't rent a car
unless I'm going outside of the city and it's just cheaper/easier to keep it
while I'm staying on the strip. For locals, I imagine it will make some pay
more and some switch to off-strip casinos but the higher gaming tiers still
get comped anyway.

ADDED: I've been told that one of the issues was increased freeloading by
people going away on trips and parking at strip hotels, especially Mandalay
Bay but I'm not sure how much to credit that given other solutions that don't
involve charging everyone for parking.

------
Reason077
I am optimistic that self-driving technology and electrification will go along
way towards addressing the negative externalities (safety, pollution,
congestion, noise) of motor vehicles in the coming decades.

In the mean time, the real problem with urban speed limits in the UK is that
there is very little enforcement. Speed limits are meaningless because they
are widely ignored.

This blog post suggests that might be about to change, at least in Birmingham.

As a driver, pedestrian, and cyclist, I think that's a very good thing.

~~~
pacala
Every time people get a realistic economical option, they majority choses to
live in their own spacious dwelling. The utopia of crowded cities where people
stack on top of each other, just for the sake of walking / biking everywhere,
is just that, an utopia.

Self-driving technology will make extreme commutes common. Too expensive to
live in Mountain View? No problem, get a nice 3000sqft house in Santa Rosa,
hop in the self driving car, handle emails / some tickets, get into the office
for the usual team bonding rituals, hop into the car, do some solo coding,
then enjoy a quiet evening with the kids.

~~~
ghaff
I'll actually be shocked if this doesn't happen where jobs are in expensive
congested areas whether because people want cheaper housing or just want to
live somewhere quieter and closer to nature. You don't even need door-to-door
self-driving. Just on highways would be sufficient for a lot of routes.

There's obviously some upper limit. But a driving commute in heavy traffic
that most would consider pretty hellish today (say 1.5 to 2 hours each way)
becomes a lot more palatable if you can read/work/etc.

It's pretty much Economics 101 that if you make something
better/cheaper/easier you get more of it.

------
throw2016
A car has more function than just going about your daily life. It gives you
freedom to go wherever you please as long as there is a road. You as an
individual might never use this freedom but it is there and many people take
advantage of it. Same with a horse or a bicycle but with a car you can go
further and with few restrictions.

Giving this up because of the temporary convenience of self driving cars even
if we assume the technology is here is a poor trade because as we have seen
repeatedly with technology comes obsessive surveillance and control. And busy
bodies love to impose rules and restrictions once it becomes possible. And
these will be on the free movement of people.

So its important to consider the ramnifications and tradeoffs and move
carefully and with societal consensus rather than because some VCs are bullish
on self driving technology or because the technology exists.

~~~
nathanaldensr
Americans take their freedoms for granted. We Americans haven't experienced
war on our soil within living memory. In general, America is safe and
individuals have enormous freedom. I worry that the younger among us are
ushering in more and more technology, and, as you stated, with that technology
will come surveillance and an easier means for corporations and government to
inspect, analyze, and control our lives. Hand-waving these concerns is naive
and demonstrates a lack of knowledge and understanding of history and just how
evil people in positions of power can be.

~~~
zero_iq
> with that technology will come surveillance and...

Wrong tense. This has already happened. What 'will come' is more of it.

~~~
nathanaldensr
You're right; I should've said _additional surveillance_.

------
lacampbell
I view driving as a kind of bad habit. I mean it's very easy to see the
appeal. You get to travel long distances at great speed in your own private
sitting room. They are amazing tools.

I think the real issue is we overuse them and develop a huge dependency on
them. And people in general are completely blind to their downsides.

------
kylehotchkiss
I've been in the most horrifying accident most people can think of... rollover
at 80mph because some random guy chased me down down the highway and rammed me
off the road.

I was scared for a while, but I still love driving. More things will be
electric in a few years, sure. Maybe we need more stern punishments for
distracted driving. Maybe we need some more assistance to prevent us from
going off the road when we are sleepy. But I think people will enjoy driving
for the same reason they enjoy tube amps, it's not perfect, but it has a
warmth and human element of imperfection to it and people might just like
that.

~~~
ra1n85
>But I think people will enjoy driving for the same reason they enjoy tube
amps, it's not perfect, but it has a warmth and human element of imperfection
to it and people might just like that.

Agreed. I enjoy the feel of a combustion engine, the sounds, and the drama.
Particularly so from forced induction engines. I know electric is coming, and
in many ways is already better, but it lacks the personality that I enjoy in
driving (for now, at least).

~~~
freehunter
Horses had an even stronger personality, but we manged to find joy in
horseless carriages too.

------
atemerev
Sorry, but I, personally, enjoy cars and driving, observe speed limits, and
you, good sir, can take my steering wheel from my cold, dead hands.

If you want cooperation and understanding from us drivers, you'd want to stop
patronizing, negging and insulting us. Otherwise, you'd be ignored at best.

~~~
to3m
I hear ignoring them is the first step.

------
id122015
How could driving go extinct? Whith all these self driving cars, who is going
to fix the broken tires when it happens? What broken tires ?

And if men enjoy driving, who can stop them ?

~~~
freehunter
>And if men enjoy driving, who can stop them ?

The government. The government stops a lot of people from doing a lot of
things they enjoy because those things pose a danger to society. That's like
90% of the reason the government exists.

>who is going to fix the broken tires when it happens?

Mechanics. Just like they do today. There's nothing different about the tires
on a self-driving car than on any other car.

------
djhworld
This is why I would never cycle in London, ever.

~~~
skdhslkdjb
surprizingly it's actually safer than cycling on country roads! Most drivers
in London are polite and vigilant whereas they will actively try to kill you
in the country.

~~~
Doctor_Fegg
Most drivers on country backroads where I live (Cotswolds, UK) are safe and
respectful. The dangerous places are provincial towns/cities - worked and
cycled in a large Staffordshire town for six years, it was horrid - and rural
A roads, but any decent cycle route planner (ie not GMaps) will keep you off
the latter for the most part.

~~~
freehunter
The dangerous part is a car coming over a hill or around a bend and not seeing
the slow cyclist in front of them until it's too late. Not that the drivers
are actively looking to injure the cyclists, but that the speed differential
between bicycles and autos leads to terrible accidents.

