this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2023
21 points (86.2% liked)

Fuck Cars

9789 readers
5 users here now

This community exists as a sister community/copycat community to the r/fuckcars subreddit.

This community exists for the following reasons:

You can find the Matrix chat room for this community here.

Rules

  1. Be nice to each other. Being aggressive or inflammatory towards other users will get you banned. Name calling or obvious trolling falls under that. Hate cars, hate the system, but not people. While some drivers definitely deserve some hate, most of them didn't choose car-centric life out of free will.

  2. No bigotry or hate. Racism, transphobia, misogyny, ableism, homophobia, chauvinism, fat-shaming, body-shaming, stigmatization of people experiencing homeless or substance users, etc. are not tolerated. Don't use slurs. You can laugh at someone's fragile masculinity without associating it with their body. The correlation between car-culture and body weight is not an excuse for fat-shaming.

  3. Stay on-topic. Submissions should be on-topic to the externalities of car culture in urban development and communities globally. Posting about alternatives to cars and car culture is fine. Don't post literal car fucking.

  4. No traffic violence. Do not post depictions of traffic violence. NSFW or NSFL posts are not allowed. Gawking at crashes is not allowed. Be respectful to people who are a victim of traffic violence or otherwise traumatized by it. News articles about crashes and statistics about traffic violence are allowed. Glorifying traffic violence will get you banned.

  5. No reposts. Before sharing, check if your post isn't a repost. Reposts that add something new are fine. Reposts that are sharing content from somewhere else are fine too.

  6. No misinformation. Masks and vaccines save lives during a pandemic, climate change is real and anthropogenic - and denial of these and other established facts will get you banned. False or highly speculative titles will get your post deleted.

  7. No harassment. Posts that (may) cause harassment, dogpiling or brigading, intentionally or not, will be removed. Please do not post screenshots containing uncensored usernames. Actual harassment, dogpiling or brigading is a bannable offence.

Please report posts and comments that violate our rules.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

https://www.theverge.com/2023/8/10/23827790/waymo-cruise-cpuc-vote-robotaxi-san-francisco

Man I just read this article and this is nuts if true. I can't imagine ever willingly stepping inside a driverless car for any reason...

top 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Num10ck@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

the reason will be that it is much safer and less expensive.

im wondering if the fuckcars community would split between fuckshittydrivers and fuckevensafecarsthat dont need parking lots or gas.

[–] LibertyLizard 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Is there actual evidence it’s safer though? All I’ve seen is claims by the self driving companies which I do not trust. Where is the independent research on this topic?

There was an article on here yesterday about how these are causing havoc in SF for emergency responders. I’m sure they’re safer in some cases but I want to see proof that they’ve accounted for every possible scenario. That’s quite difficult to do. Not to mention that cars are still dangerous even if you completely eliminate driver error.

[–] no_priority@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago

Anecdotally, I see them all the time in my neighborhood, and they seem much more attentive to pedestrians and stop signs than regular drivers. Drivers in this neighborhood act like they own the place even though there's probably an equal number of pedestrians out at any given time.

I've also seen one of them fail to pull over when an emergency vehicle was behind it, so I buy that they are causing some problems.

[–] Nouveau_Burnswick@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I'm of the mindset that taxis are good, even in an otherwise car free city.

I'm neutral if they are robocabs or no.

[–] Lauchs@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Long-term, I think self driving cars will reduce overall car purchases etc. If more people can easily access on demand cats, transit between large hubs (think train stations) and then grabbing a cheap, autonomous vehicle for the last leg of one's journey becomes much easier.

Not everyone is lucky enough to live and work right by a major transit hub...

[–] Transform2942@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago

Also HUGE advantage: robotaxis don't require sprawling parking lots in high density residential or commercial areas

[–] mondoman712@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It could, especially given that cars spend on average 95% of the time parked, but it could also massively increase the number of miles driven.

[–] Lauchs@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Sure, but as it also makes upgrading to electric (don't have to convince as many people, replace fewer cars etc) this doesn't seem as big a problem.

[–] dudewitbow@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A lot of places have bad drivers, and debatedly, a robo driver for instance would probably better than a drunk driver. Both have faults. Robo drivers are pretty good when everything is by the book but its bad with edge cases. Human drivers can cover edges better, but y becomes a trust that said human isnt either a terrible driver or impaired for any reason.

[–] jessta@aus.social 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

@dudewitbow @JetpackJackson my concern with robo-taxises is specifically that they're not good at the edge cases. This means there will be a push to remove those edge cases, to simplify streets to match the abilities of the robo-taxises. We start to design our cities for the limitations of some software

[–] dudewitbow@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

We already live in a world of edge cases. Because of the existing design of needing to have a car to get around, we have incidents like this:

https://nypost.com/2023/08/11/los-angeles-elderly-driver-kills-woman-after-plowing-car-into-dealership/

Which only exist because of the necessity to drive in the first place. This is a edge case where a human driver is arguably more dangerous to society than yhe autonomous driver, and only happened because some old people require a car to get around from their homes due to either lack of ability or unwillingness to move, and poor public transportation.

[–] JetpackJackson@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago

Oh true, I didn't think of that. Edge cases, I mean. I'm just always so nervous about these autonomous things that I just kinda marked it down as generally a bad thing, but now that I'm reading what others have commented, it does seem like there are more pros that I haven't seen or thought about. So thanks for that.

(Also I noticed that you tried to ping me by mentioning me but I didn't get a ping, is that a kbin thing?)

[–] NeoAgostosTheos@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Having worked at an AV company, I can say that there are a lot of growing pains associated with it. Generally this technology errs on the side of caution 99.9% of the times which can be frustrating at times. The good thing though is that people that suck at driving usually aren’t interested in the driving so if we can offload that, it should make for safer roads overall. Plus worst case, it will significantly reduce drunk driving accidents in the long run.