this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2023
7 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

67 readers
2 users here now

This magazine is dedicated to discussions on the latest developments, trends, and innovations in the world of technology. Whether you are a tech enthusiast, a developer, or simply curious about the latest gadgets and software, this is the place for you. Here you can share your knowledge, ask questions, and engage in discussions on topics such as artificial intelligence, robotics, cloud computing, cybersecurity, and more. From the impact of technology on society to the ethical considerations of new technologies, this category covers a wide range of topics related to technology. Join the conversation and let's explore the ever-evolving world of technology together!

founded 2 years ago
 

From the opinion piece:

Our research at MIT helped make the case for ride-sharing. We were wrong. We don’t want to make the same mistake with robotaxis ...

top 8 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago

What? How did anyone think that Uber could possibly help traffic?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Uber whas supposed to make some guys rich, what are you all smoking?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I suspect that the “logic” behind the Uber will reduce traffic argument would give me a headache.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

There is an argument, and it's pretty straightforward and reasonable. In congested cities, a large percent of drivers (I've seen as high as 1/3 for downtown Manhattan pre-pandemic) are within a few blocks of destination and are actively seeking parking, and Uber doesn't need to park. Which does imply an actually-correct argument -- the amount of parking you need in a city to support cars being the primary transportation mode is ridiculous.

But the entire sales pitch of Uber is that it will be so quick and easy that you'll use it without a thought. Their entire business model is to generate more trips, not consolidate or reduce trips. There is no incentive in them to reduce how long their users spend on the road absent competition with bikeped/public transit. There's a reason Uber pools never caught on. Obviously the easier car trips get, the more people will make trips by car. And while the parking geometry is insane, the road geometry of non-parking vehicles being the primary transportation mode is barely any better. Especially when you consider you've simply shifted a large number of vehicles-seeking-parking into vehicles-seeking-fare.

Absent any investment in better bikeped and public transportation, it is possible Uber can have a marginal improvement to congestion. But not enough to really make a difference and improve anyones' lives. And it's also possible it slightly worsens it by generating trips that otherwise would've simply not happened because the traffic sucked too bad.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

One person in a 2 ton metal box will never fix traffic, it does not matter who or what is driving.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's two people when it comes to Uber though (for now).

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

But only one of them needs to get somewhere.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Well yeah, the solution to traffic is mass transit. Invest in rail and busses if you want to solve traffic, and then build density around stations. That way most of my traffic is between stations, and busses feed the rail system.

It's not complicated. Uber and other ride share services are designed to replace taxis, not reduce traffic.