In fact, look at self-driving taxis or cars as your personal and private "bus" or limo, if you will.
In fact, look at self-driving taxis or cars as your personal and private "bus" or limo, if you will.
That's certainly where this is going, but the problem with mass transit is bootstrapping.
Currently, I take one of the Amtrak trains regularly, not terribly fast, but I'm not driving. However, I still need a car at either end of the train for the short hop to house/office.
If I could summon a self-driving car, I would take the train more often. In addition, if I could summon a self-driving car, I wouldn't worry about keeping a strict schedule at the office (very few places have trains/subways that run with enough frequency that you don't have to pay attention to schedule).
Don't know why they didn't do mass transportation, but my guess is legislation and unions. Getting rid of personal cars and human driving taxis is private industry. Mass transportation will have a large percentage be public sector workers and union workers.
If this is the path of least resistence and is proven to work, they will most likely go after mass transportation as well.
Buses are more complicated than cars (city driving, people at stops etc), so doing cars first makes sense.
>Buses are more complicated than cars (city driving, people at stops etc), so doing cars first makes sense.
I don't think this is a valid argument. I see self driving cars operating in Mountain View (a city, albeit not a crazy driving city like SF or Boston), these cars are aware of people as stated in the article, the condition of people at stops can start with stopping at... well stops ->recognizing people that are waiting there. Maybe prepayment to figure out how many people should have boarded.