[danielvaughn]

This might be a naive question, but are driverless lanes being considered? For instance we have bike lanes all over the US. It might make sense to make a similar investment for AI-friendly lanes to help transition to driverless transportation.

[ericmay]

It'll be a dark, sick twist that driverless cars will get their own protected lanes in many American cities before bikes do.

[danielvaughn]

Counterpoint: traffic congestion is almost entirely due to individual driver differences. An automated lane would be vastly more efficient and could potentially lead to fewer lanes being needed for vehicles altogether. This is assuming that most cars would be automated so I'm talking about a more distant future, but I see that as more realistic than convincing America to abandon it's car addiction.

[ericmay]

Making it easier to take a car places has always caused an increase in driving. I don't see a reason that this would change with increases in automation. It's an additive solution (like feature bloat, for example) when we need subtractive solutions (better products)

[fuzzbazz]

Isn't San Francisco very hilly? That's pretty bad for biking, it's a waste to reserve lanes for bikes if nobody will use them.

[ericmay]

Meh they're not really bad for biking, and you can also just walk your bike up the hill, take a street car, or since you are probably using a bike with battery assist you can just ride up the hill.

There are plenty of options that negate this as a concern (actually it's not even a concern), especially when the alternative is big government autonomous vehicle welfare shoving ads up your ass and nickel-and-diming every move you make to participate in society.

Want to protest something? Sorry the government shut down your ride. Whoops you were mistaken for a terrorist - straight to jail! Did you forget to pay your Waymo bill? Guess you're stuck at home until you get the funds to pay it. Heading to the airport? Sorry sir you can't exit the car while the car is in motion, 40 minutes ETA until you arrive at your destination. But I can walk, it's right there! Sorry sir for your safety and those around you please enjoy this new Netflix special while you wait. You can purchase this bottle of condensed milk for $7.99 and it'll automatically be deducted from your paycheck.

Car-only infrastructure isn't just a really stupid and expensive way of doing things, it also keeps you under control.

[lotsoweiners]

Why though? We have plenty of bike lanes in my city and I see hundreds of cars for every bike I see. Usually those bike riders are either kids who ride on sidewalks or dudes in spandex who don’t seem to be going anywhere.

[tivert]

> This might be a naive question, but are driverless lanes being considered? For instance we have bike lanes all over the US. It might make sense to make a similar investment for AI-friendly lanes to help transition to driverless transportation.

That idea doesn't make sense. Where would the space for the dedicated lanes come from, especially on city streets (like the one in the OP)? The existing traffic could use those lanes more effectively, and it would be wrong to waste it because driverless cars suck and their developers are insistently shoving them out the door despite that.

[ww520]

They are called train track.

[danielvaughn]

Well I mean yeah, one of the benefits of trains is how efficient the track system is. So in a sense yes I'm talking about extending the notion of a train track and applying it to commonly used roads. If we get to a point where the majority of vehicles are capable of being driverless, then an automated lane would be much more efficient and would probably reduce traffic congestion.

[frob]

Doing something like that takes massive public investments in changing our roads and infrastructure. Given that this money will come from the public, I would argue that it should be spent on publicly accessible tools and services, like enhanced public transit. I do not want to spend public money to build public infrastructure for the gain of massive private companies' experiments.

[danielvaughn]

I mean, maybe? But it could be something as simple as (a) pick a designated color like purple or something, (b) paint a purple line in that lane, (c) make it a law that you can't operate the vehicle yourself while you're in that lane.

I don't mean doing this today. I'm talking about a future where most vehicles have a driverless capability. The reason why it would be useful is that a lane of automated cars would be safer and more efficient. But the reality we have right now is that driverless cars are intermixed with human-driven cars, which will always be a danger.

[omniglottal]

Disregard the price of your purple line, for I, a taxpayer, paid for the road you wish to paint. My car registration fees paid for it too. Don't dare assume it's OK to prevent me from driving on this public infrastructure. A couple year ago, politicians reduced a central thoroughfare through our city from two lanes to one, where a dedicated lane now exists for busses. This was profoundly unpopular and has increased congestion. Which of the one remaining lanes would you like to paint purple now?

[danielvaughn]

Expand your horizon farther into the future. Imagine a world where the majority of vehicles have driverless capabilities. If you were to reserve a lane for automated traffic, it would significantly improve congestion and could lead to fewer lanes being needed at all.

[burkaman]

I don't think it would make sense. Dedicated lanes still need to close or have construction sometimes, and you still have to get out of the dedicated lane at some point and drive to your final destination. It wouldn't solve any problem, it would just make drivers even more complacent and unlikely to act when their car gets out of the dedicated lane and crashes into something.

Bike lanes make sense because bikes can't go as fast as cars and are unprotected in the event of a collision. Bus lanes make sense because buses have dedicated predictable routes, and efficient bus lanes increase the number of people that can get around.

[rchaud]

There are bike lanes all over the US? Since when?

Also, isn't Musk setting up Hyperloop, or was that another publicity stunt?

[kdmccormick]

Since the past decade or so, but especially the past couple of years: https://nextcity.org/urbanist-news/how-five-u.s.-cities-buil...

Re. Hyperloop: some have said it was a stunt to attack public support for CA high speed rail (which would reduce CA's dependency on cars): https://twitter.com/parismarx/status/1571628269555826688?lan...

EDIT: Re-reading your comment, I realize that you're challenging GP's assertion that we already have bike lanes everywhere, which I agree is obviously false.

[alistairSH]

67 miles per city.

For reference, two of the cities metioned are Austin with ~2500 miles of roads and Denver with 1900 miles.

It's a start. But that's all it is.

[shakow]

Why would we want to spend so much money to transition to driverless transportation? Just take PT if you don't want to drive.

[robswc]

Not OP, my issue with public transport is mostly the "public" part. At least on the DC metro, its not uncommon to see people getting harassed and MPD doing nothing about it. I've personally seen a drunk man pissing in the corner and watching it get carried by momentum through half the car. Sure, it's probably like a 1/50 trips you see something bad happening... but its still enough for me to prefer personal transportation.

The other half is the stuff you can't do, like carry large items or eat on the train. Just got some large boards for a DIY project and stopped by in-N-out. ~10 minutes there and back. Would have taken an hour w/PT, couldn't carry materials and couldn't stop for food. With a driver-less car, I could still do that.

I'm not suggesting any money go towards paying for driver-less lanes atm though. Still feels way too early for that.

[alistairSH]

The answer to those problems is more public transit (in the US, it's mostly working class - if we make it normal across the socio-economic spectrum, people will demand more of it), more bike lanes, and safer spaces for pedestrians.

If it took you ~10 minutes to get to the store, it's probably ~2 miles by car. Maybe a bit further. That's easily done on a bicycle (not for large boards, but easily doable for moderate grocery runs or other regular errands). Or, a bus/tram - might take a few minutes more waiting for it to arrive at each end, but still not an hour (if it runs regularly enough, which it obviously doesn't).

[robswc]

>If it took you ~10 minutes to get to the store, it's probably ~2 miles by car

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but its closer to 7. Speed limit is 70 mph for most of the drive, haha.

Even if it was 2 miles, that's gonna be close to 30 min each way, an hour spent just on commuting for groceries. I don't think I could justify it tbh, and I like biking enough. I'm usually just carrying stuff though, if I'm leaving the house to go shopping.

If it was going to/from the exact place, perhaps. It's just so convenient to grab the keys and not have to worry about schedules or arranging how you'll carry everything back.

Perhaps if I lived in a city and it was my only choice though.

[danielvaughn]

I fail to see how more public transit would solve the drunk-guy-pissing-in-the-corner issue.

[alistairSH]

If public transit is normalized (used by the majority of people, particularly those with money and some political power), those people will demand enforcement of "don't piss in the corner" laws. The problem today is mass transit (outside NYC and a few other places) is largely used by working class with neither the means, power, or time to push for change.

[danielvaughn]

It's not bad reasoning, though I just want to point out that NYC has tons of public transit, used by both working class and non-working-class people, and those problems persist.

[LatteLazy]

I'm all for public transport, and I don't think this will happen but...

Because driverless cars are safer, faster and more efficient.

[kdmccormick]

...than what, regular cars, or public transit?

Good public transit is WAY safer and more efficient than cars of any sort. It could be faster, too, if we prioritized it over cars like much of Europe has.

[shakow]

> more efficient.

Beg your pardon? How is 2.5 tons of steel to carry a handful of people more efficient than a tram?

[LatteLazy]

Private trams? Sounds worse than private cars to me.

Public trans? I already said I'd support that, but it's not on the menu is it.

[micromacrofoot]

We absolutely do not have bike lanes all over the US, most cities are barely getting started adding them

[danielvaughn]

I didn't say we had reached a saturation point, I'm merely pointing out that we've mustered up the investment to build them.

[micromacrofoot]

I'm not trying to argue, it's just that the claim "bike lanes all over the US" is not remotely true no matter how you slice it