Self driving cars is a dead end technology, that will introduce a whole host of new problems which are already solved with public transit, better urban planning, etc.
> Redesigning and rebuilding city transportation infrastructure isn't happening, look around.
We have been redesigning and rebuilding city transportation infrastructure since we had cities. Where I live (Seattle) they are opening a new light rail bridge crossing just next month (first rail over a floting bridge; which is technologically very interesting), and two new rail lines are being planned. In the 1960s the Bay area completely revolutionized their transit sytem when they opened BART.
I think you are simply wrong here.
66 years later we see California struggling terribly with implementation of a high-speed rail system -- where the placement/location of the infrastructure largely is targeted for areas far less dense than the Bay Area.
I don't think there is any single reason why this is so much more difficult now then it was in 1960 -- but clearly things have changed quite a lot in that time.
The US already did it once (just in the wrong direction) by redesigning all cities to be unfriendly to humans and only navigable by cars. It should be technically possible to revert that mistake.
Trains need tracks, cars - already have the infrastructure to drive on.
> Self driving cars is a dead end technology, that will introduce a whole host of new problems which are already solved with public transit, better urban planning, etc.
Self driving cars will literally become a part of public transit
I’ve been hearing people say that for almost 15 years now. I believe it when I see it.
I'm willing to wager that you might not actually believe it at that point either.
I would be happy to bet on some strict definition of your claim.
It will prove disruptive to the driving industry, but I think we’ve been through worse disruptions and fared the better for it.
There is no way metro and trains will be a solid way of transportation in LA for at least a few more decades, even if people of Bel-Air stop fighting trains that go deep under Bel-Air and people of valley stop being unreasonable. Even if next president, rollbacks contingency requirement changes that trump did. Even America remember how to build large infrastructure projects.
It will never be the ideal "you're always at most 20-30 minutes of walking away from the station" density here in LA.
> Autonomous private cars is not the technological progress you think it is. We’ve had autonomous trains for decades, and while it provides us with a more efficient and cost effective public transit system, it didn’t open the doors for the next revolutionary technology.
There is a huge difference between going on rails and going on public roads. There are plenty of "dead end technologies" that we use to this day.
Good point. However that does not apply to self driving cars because the problem it is trying to fix is a lot more complex then how to heat your microwave burrito more quickly. Self driving cars shares many of the same problems with human driven cars, including traffic congestion. If we see a mass employment of self driving cars in our cities, these problems will still remain, and the only thing this technology has solved is the need for commuters to pay attention 100% of the way. While nice, that is not revolutionary.
I think you are underselling your city here. LA has an excellent bus system which can be improved further still. LA also has the potential of installing a world class bicycle infrastructure, and me personally I am fairly optimistic that sometime in the near future, your city will put my city of Seattle to shame with your bike network.
No really, insanity that usually happens inside a bus in LA aside, it still goes on the same congested roads. "Bus Only" becomes a suggestion once rush hour starts (I can see bus only line backed up by not buses every day our of my window).
I mostly use metro because buses not worth it for me. Metro network is either wonderful stops or very bad stops. There is a massive "cleanup" attempt before the Olympics. Some will be right where you want to go and some are in the middle of a freeway 20 minutes of walking away from anything.
The fact that K line does not go through Getty Center to please a handful of people and car brains saddens me.
> LA also has the potential of installing a world class bicycle infrastructure
Please no. Cyclists are probably the most hated category on the road even by other cyclists. I'd ban cycling on public roads in most of LA if it were up to me.
Same was said about electricity, or the internet.
i dont want my uber driver bragging anout how theyre going to shoot me before i get out of the car
As to the revolt, America doesn't do that any more. Years of education have removed both the vim and vigor of our souls. People will complain. They will do a TikTok dance as protest. Some will go into the streets. No meaningful uprising will occur.
The poor and the affected will be told to go to the trades. That's the new learn to program. Our tech overlords will have their media tell us that everything is ok (packaging it appropriately for the specific side of the aisle).
Ultimately the US will go down hill to become a Belgium. Not terrible, but not a world dominating, hand cutting entity it once was.
Sharing one's opinion in a respectful way is possible. Less spectacle, so less eyeballs, but worth it. Try it.
The original Luddite movement arose in response to automation in the textile industry.
They committed violence. Violence was committed against them. All tragic events when viewed from a certain perspective.
My rhetorical question is this: did any of this result in any meaningful impedance of the "march of technological progress"?
The irony
I'm curious why you say this given you start by highlighting several characteristics that are not like Belgium (to wit, poor education, political media capture, effective oligarchy). I feel there are several other nations that may be better comparators, just want to understand your selection.