That's okay, once automation really gets going, Mom & Dad will be out of work, solving that problem.
This bleeds over into decisions that affects other aspects such as telecommuting, paternity leave, etc.
Or it will become a poverty trap.
Not according to studies I've seen, including the one cited in my original comment [1]. They map commute patterns, urban, suburban and rural, and take simultaneity and fleet access into account.
In Ann Arbor, Michigan a "shared fleet [was predicted to] provide almost instantaneous access [fractions of one minute] to a vehicle with a fleet of only 15% of the number of privately owned vehicles that would have been used for these trips." In a rural study conducted in Germany, maximum wait was estimated at 5 minutes with fleet capacity at around 20%.
[1] http://sustainablemobility.ei.columbia.edu/files/2012/12/Tra...
It only accounts for trips internal to the city which already have low wait times with existing taxi cabs, and does not simulate the waits for trips traversing into/out of the city.
Give people an economic incentive for keeping a neat car, then you're going to see neat cars. This is clearly true for the current Uber and Lyft fleets.
A friend with an incredibly smart 7 year old still has a messy car. Her daughter, despite the ability to read and understand things well above her age, is a 7 year old. The car is a mess.
When it comes to these pie in the sky utopian scenarios, I wish people on HN would step outside and actual observe every day people.
Right, and that's a choice. It has nothing to do with "she's a 7 year old" and everything to do with "she's allowed to make a mess in the car".
I was never allowed to eat in the car beyond the odd sweet, and I wouldn't have thrown wrappers or anything else on the floor on pain of death... I find it mind boggling that the child is blamed for the state of the car, when realistically it is just a parenting choice. There are 7 year olds with exceptional table manners even in this modern day, and there are 7 year olds I'm embarrassed to eat at the same table as.
I'm fine with people choosing to have messy cars (mine oscillates between spotless and a dump over ~3 month periods) - but it's a choice and other choices can be made.
Maybe it is "choice", but there are a lot of people out there where the "choice" around their vehicle is closer to that of it is lived in, may have books and papers, clothing, toys, etc. (maybe food as well) that will not conform to this scenario.
Walk through a grocery store parking lot sometime and observe the state of vehicles as people get in/out, etc. my bet is on a sufficiently large pool would be in the condition where utopian sharing doesn't make sense.
That said, if there was a mind shift because of an overall benefit, it could happen. But, that is a long way off.
Even without the wage-cost of drivers, individual taxi service may still be too expensive to match the lower demand.
No one likes buses, because buses are slow. They're slow because they make lots of stops that are irrelevant to your trip. As someone that regularly rode the school bus on a route that took an hour, compared to a 10 minute direct route. Fuck buses.
Yes taxis, exist, but not many. The only people I knew that ever took them were people that lost their licenses.
What you've actually described is a shuttle service. They exist everywhere. They're not popular because they're slow. Last time I took a shared shuttle from the airport it took an additional 45 minutes to get home than driving direct. They have more convenient pick up schedules and locations, but the transit times are almost as bad.
The cycle of poverty is strong in these rural locations because of the lack of public transportation and the cost to maintain a vehicle to hold a job. There are plenty of low-income people moving to common destinations (city center, plants, etc.) that would use an on-demand shared shuttle service if it had at-door pickup.
Having worked a couple summers on a factory line, we would set up carpools and pick people up along the way to work each day. Don't be a dismissive dick just because you personally didn't like your school bus ride.
Because? Really? Because someone has to buy a car? I think your feelings are in the way of your cognitive ability.
>of low-income people moving to common destinations I'm sure there are plenty of low-income people moving to the suburbs/rural areas because they are being priced out of high density centers.
Lets not forget, 5% of the population uses the bus, that's including major urban centers like NYC. Nationally, nobody uses the bus, its a joke throw back to a time before cars. Fuck buses.
I rarely bother to even use their (world class) MRT I love the buses so much.
An advanced city is not a place where the poor move about in cars, rather it’s where even the rich use public transportation
Also, I would add that subways are probably a better way forward than busses for a modern city, or at least some sort of connected underground transport system.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driving_in_Singapore
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-06-04/singapore-...
https://www.google.com/search?q=singapore+size
I also agree that Subways are awesome - and Singapore has an awesome system for such a young country, and they are going to be adding a new one each year through 2024 - That's a new line, not just a new station. [1]
The nice thing about bus stops - is they are everywhere, and the buses come by very frequently, and they all have GPS locators on them - so you can time your arrival to the stop to be when the bus arrives (which you can look up on your smart phone). I've never been a fan of buses before Singapore - but it's great to see what can be done in a country where cars are not the default option.
[1] http://www.lta.gov.sg/apps/news/page.aspx?c=2&id=80d3169f-dc...
55% of commuters in New York city use public transportation, 34% in SF, 26% in Chicago, 40% in D.C., etc. Don't be a dick about cognitive ability when you're quoting a 5% number that includes people who don't even have access to buses.
Smaller buses able to optimise routes to make fewer stops will help. Split the current big bus into 3-4 smaller ones and the people going close to the full distance might not stop for the first 80% of stops. That would cut out a lot of time.
Obviously rural areas will be the last to see these changes for non-commercial traffic.
On the other hand, I've used airport busses between transit hubs in cities where everyone takes the subway and it was really quite nice. Better if I ever figure out luggage delivery, of course.
> 1. Mom, dad, and kid all need to go to work/school at roughly the same time.
Start times (school and work) are just arbitrary numbers. We changed our school start time to help with parents dropping off kids to multiple schools (primary and secondary schools) and then on to work (9:30 start is unusual but fine)
#1, work/school from home, optimized schedules, etc
#2, you could get in/off the "car" in your own little capsule...
#3, those fleets of cars would park at the most efficient spots possible by using big data so the wait times could be reduced significantly (or the wait could be eliminated completely if the schedule is known ahead).
2. User feedback could be a useful deterrent against messing up someone else's SDC, in the same way that both drivers and passengers can leave feedback with Uber today.
3. True, but one can adapt to this.
Or maybe i'm just hopelessly optimistic... :)
My conclusion is that car sharing services are quite expensive. I can do no more than 3 or 4 short rentals a month before the cost start to resemble that of owning a used car. I do save money, but only because I drive a tiny fraction of what I drove when I did own a car.
Of course, car sharing is not as efficient as SDCs that can move around and maximize usage, but even SDCs would mostly end up parked at night and off-peak hours. Coupled with your point #4, I'm afraid it won't be long before driving the current average yearly mileage using those services become massively, prohibitively expensive.
I'm not sure how that would be a gain for anyone but the environment.
If I was using an on-call car service that I could ping 10 minutes before I'm ready to go each day, I can do that without triggering my concerns.
*Note however: I currently commute by bus since I moved to Seattle, and I make up for hating being ready by an exact time by instead choosing a bus route that has a bus every 15 minutes.
1. Mom, dad, and kid all need to go to work/school at roughly the same time. If they all have a 15-20 minute commute (well below average for many areas) and the destinations for all three aren't in the same immediate vicinity, we're right back to the family needing 2-3 cars.
2. Eh, no. Go to the mall or a shopping center parking lot and walk around looking in people's cars. The average person's car is somewhere between messy and a pigsty. IMO, this will only get worse with SDCs, since people will be able to do more eating/dressing/preparing/relaxing in their car without the need to drive. Not to mention the number of people who simply don't want random strangers using their car. Uber or Lyft would have to offer a significant fee before I would even consider it.
3. Vehicle owners are used to convenience. If I live in 20 minutes outside the city, then I probably have to wait 20-30 minutes for a ride to arrive before I even start my trip. Massively inconvenient, and not worth it.
SDCs will definitely lead to change in American society, but I have to wonder if it won't completely backfire on some of these expectations, and actually lead to American society sprawling out even more into the suburban and rural areas. WFH is becoming a viable option for more and more jobs, and longer commutes will be much more acceptable to most people when the time in their car isn't simply lost time.