this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2026
1350 points (99.3% liked)
memes
21719 readers
3456 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I looked for studies, but completely autonomous driving has too little data yet. But from A matched case-control analysis of autonomous vs human-driven vehicle accidents | Nature Communications, severe injury and fatalities are lower. I suspect "per driven mile" it's even less and it depends on model.
Not sure where you get your numbers shout DEATH AND DESTRUCTION!!! about self driving cars. I can only assume it's out of your ass.
It doesn't even matter. 65 fatalities over a few years is nothing. What matters is how the technology improves in the next years and how the numbers look once there is significant adoption. That it's as good as it is now basically means you're already wrong.
First of all thank you for a more well reasoned answer.
I do think that there are several issues remaining however. First of all the cited article states that in case matched scenarios autonomous vehicles are less likely to crash, however this does not apply in bad weather conditions where they are about 6 times more likely to crash.
The above illustrates my point about failing gracefully, the autonomous systems work great under a huge range of conditions, the catch being that these conditions have to be preconceived. When encountering new conditions these systems tend to fail. These untested conditions might occur to bad visibility or water over camera lenses and so on. A human just is better at adapting to new situations quickly which is also confirmed in the above figures.
Now to the point of the future development and mass adoption I am not really opposed due to safety concerns, it is possible to make these systems safe. However in order to make them safe you would have to make their surroundings extremely predictable. I.e. you would have to adapt the infrastructure to suit the autonomous car. If you're building infrastructure anyway, why not built rail infrastructure? It's proven, cheaper, more efficient, has a proven safety record and is environmentally friendly.
Cars are great for situations where you need transport over areas that are quite unpredictable e.g. many rural areas with badly maintained roads. However autonomous vehicles are not suited for this unpredictability.
The fact that autonomous vehicles are being pushed anyway regardless of the risks is stupid in my opinion as the resources and brain cycles could be much better invested.
I've recently imagined if you could build some kind of "micro monorail". Like some simple 4x4 inch metal rail that is used for a very small "pod" similar to the podbike / a velomobile. Like a 1 seater or 2 face to face seater which only weights like 200 kg instead of large heavy trains. You could just use earth screws and poles and weld them to the microrail, have it close to the ground or rise up 6 meters high to cross over existing roads or obstacles. You could also have a welding robot on that same rail to endlessly extend the rail and do all this installation automatically. And everything could be recycled.
I'm not sure you can follow this somewhat mad idea, but this could connect rural and urban areas without the need to build costly roads, and at the same time transport internet, energy, goods, trash, maybe even water. Fully automated and with ultralight vehicles this could be the cheapest, least invasive and lowest energy transport ever.
Anyway, I'm a fan of rail, but it does have a problem: You need railroad switches and that adds a lot of complexity compared to a car. Every stop, turnaround or crossing needs it's own stopping rail and switches which adds a lot of moving parts. So for some parts this could be a great solution, but for others it's overkill. Basically in a city, there is a limit to how close rail can get you to your house.
So in a city you're stuck with waiting for larger train cars and longer walking times. Small individual railcars won't work, and so they can't replace roads or cars. I believe that it's like a fundamental mathematical density limit to rail. And if you go shopping, you don't want to carry heavy bags or crates for like 10 min to your house. You can, but it kinda sucks.
And I don't believe that within a city at 50 kmh energy consumption between a self driving "podbike" with rubber inflatible wheels on roads and a tram or metro is significant. It probably only is about 10% at max, or maybe even less.
So in an urban area self driving "micro cars" would be the most universal scaling solution that would be most comfortable to people as well because they can drive you and your baggage directly in front of your house and can pick you up.
Obviously I haven't run the numbers, and I don't understand why there aren't any self driving narrow 1 or 2 seater cars build out of bicycle parts. Isn't this the obvious solution? There are so many advantages. Just build a million of them for one metropolis and completely switch over, ban all cars and test how it works. And make it publicly owned, basically free to ride robo taxies. It'll be cheaper for the city. Just the amount of real estate you'd gain from no big cars would be worth so much money.