Could well be, provided big boys pause their selling and more buyer demand.
We going to be told off for not being on topic, but congestion results from driver inefficiency not just the number of cars/trips. Get rid of the human and you can get rid of traffic lights, traffic lanes, car parking etc etc, you will get orders of magnitude of efficiency gains and zero congestion.
I can see where biscuit is coming from - can't you? It seems pretty obvious:
Less parking space required for driverless cars, given that they can do something useful (serving other passengers) instead of using up road space waiting for their driver to return.
Less cars overall needed (equals less road space). One car can serve many drivers.
Less safety distance required (if all cars are driverless) - more cars per road km, less congestion;
Less accidents (by removing the major cause of accidents - the human driver - out of the car) resulting in less road congestion;
More socially acceptable and planned driving maneuvers result in better rood utilization: https://medium.com/swlh/how-self-dri...n-8bad5594c5d0
Who wants to get into a car that the great unwashed use? Look at the state of the interiors of some cars now. At least with public transport someone is keeping an watch on state of cleanliness.
I am happy to let you be the Guinea pig :lol:
I think the future you describe is decades away, (but like all things about the distant future the timeline might be at quite a considerable difference to what either you or I can imagine.
In the meantime those not on their journey to $5 as expertly driven by Todd and his very capable team are going to miss out on heaps, especially with the road map to $7 to be announced next year :p
Well, yes - who wants to use a dangerous stinky and noisy car with combustion engine, if there are plenty of good carts and horses around? Oops - people did.
But no point in repeating the same old arguments again and again.
Times change and people either die or they change with them.
How good is the SP! Happy to let it ride.
Jeez - what an arrogant response ...
OK - lets use the grey cells.
Whoever uses these self driving cars would be registered with name and credit card with the provider - right?
It would not be difficult to take after every trip automatically a photo of the interior and automatically drive the car to the next cleaning station if it looks dirty or or damaged - right?
Obviously - given that the soiler or damager would be obvious (the person using the car in the last trip since it still was clean), it would be quite trivial to charge them for cleaning and / or repairs as appropriate - just deduct a cleaning fee from his credit card. If they don't pay - than there is some work for (e.g.) Turners credit recovery department and whoever soils the car never ever gets to drive one again.
Its not that hard, isn't it?
But just in case this is still too hard for you to comprehend - I am sure that due to above process the "great unwashed" as you choose to call them, will either never use these cars, or they will swiftly be trained to keep them clean. No problem at all.
Driverless cars will ADD significantly to congestion - not reduce it!
For two obvious reasons:
1. People who would otherwise use public transport will prefer the direct point to point low cost of a driverless car - therefore adding significantly more car traffic to roads.
2. For those that usually drive their own cars, driverless cars (whether it’s their own or a service) will be preferable in many situations as you don’t need to pay for parking etc. So while the amount of cars on the road for these people will be the same in one direction, after the journey is finished you now have a driverless car that is now driving somewhere else (whether that’s all the way back to the owners house, or off to a recharge center - creating a whole lot of extra traffic.
So getting back to the stock - excellent week!.