[tsimionescu]

A bus can transport 100+ people while taking up about the same road space as two or maybe three of these. Those could transport 4 or maybe 6 people. I don't think more needs to be said about the chances of this replacing actual public transport.

[BurningFrog]

True, but the big problem is that that model can only transport people from A to B, where A and B are bus stops/stations. And only at certain times.

In reality we almost always want to go from X to Y. So we end up going from X to A to B to Y.

In the end that's so inefficient that most of us buy a car. Robotaxis could change that equation drastically.

[tsimionescu]

There are two different problems.

One problem is regular trips, such as commuting and shopping, where most people need to regularly go from residential areas to office areas or to commercial areas. Here, the vast majority of people, all over the world and with few local exceptions, use public transport (trains, subways, trams, buses, etc). The fact that you have to walk a little bit to the station and from the station to your destination is not a major concern, compared to the cost and the time difference VS filled city streets. If all the people commuting, say, by subway in Tokyo were each in a robotaxi, you'd need most of the day just to finish the morning commute.

Then there are more independent trips, where your schedule is not aligned with public transport, or where there is some urgency, or where your destination is very far away from a station, or where you have very heavy bags etc. For those cases, a car is of course the ideal, so lots of people, even many of those that commute daily by public transport in cities, also own a car.

[zaroth]

The bus can only transport 100 people because it forces everyone to take the same route, regardless of where they are actually headed. This is not merely inconvenient, but a delusional take on the future of mobility.

You cannot eat on the bus. You cannot bring your grocery bags on the bus. You cannot bring your pets on the bus.

Also, there’s the fact you have to sit with (and smell) 99 other people. Some of them you may find are mentally unstable shitbags that will possibly assault you.

No thanks.

[tsimionescu]

Sure, there are inconveniences, but it is literally impossible to run a huge city any other way (I mean, other than fixed route large vehicle cramped public transport, be it busses, trains, trams etc). It is geometrically impossible to fit 20 million people on roads in cars during 1-3 hours when businesses start and end. Drivers make no difference, the problem is the form factor. This is not a technological problem, not even a physical problem, it's a problem of basic math.

[saturn8601]

Thats technically where the tunnels come in. I'm not saying its a solved problem im just saying that this real problem has obviously been considered.

[tsimionescu]

Yes, and the only solution has been found 200+ years ago: trains and other similar forms of public transport.

[saturn8601]

In the US and other places with low density, people just don't want public transit if they can avoid it. Its just not going to happen. Are you European? I ask because I constantly have europeans come on here and other places pushing public transit as the solution but people in the states just don't want it and they can't seem to internalize this.

[tsimionescu]

New York subways are pretty full too, so this is not a European vs US thing. It's just a matter of population density.

[trilbyglens]

You do realize that tunnels under cities are literally the most expensive type of infrastructure possible to build?

[saturn8601]

Im not advocating for or against it. Only pointing out that this is the solution they are proposing.

[yread]

Even flying cars are a better (ok, less worse) solution than the stupid tunnels. But Musk is not selling those yet

[Gud]

You can do all those things on a bus?