291
submitted 1 year ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

Two Cruise driverless taxis blocked an ambulance carrying a critically injured patient who later died at a hospital, a San Francisco Fire Department report said, in another incident involving self-driving cars in the city.

On Aug. 14, two Cruise autonomous vehicles were stopped in the right two lanes of a four-lane, one-way street in the SoMa neighborhood, where the victim was found, according to the department report. It said that a police vehicle in another lane had to be moved in order for the ambulance to leave.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] malloc@lemmy.world 36 points 1 year ago

In order to save lives, USA needs to get off car centric transportation. More cars is not the solution. Neither is automating them in urban and dense environments. AVs belong on the highways only.

We are trying to solve a problem with “tech” that has been a solved problem by other countries for decades. Netherlands is a great example of how to move people around efficiently without using cars as the primary mode of transportation. Amazing public transportation. Towns and cities designed around alternative forms of transportation such as walking, or biking. Infrastructure is cheaper to maintain since it lasts longer and is not constantly pounded on by multi ton vehicles.

[-] acceptable_pumpkin@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Combined with e-bikes to “flatten” hills and make distance traveling easier, we could really make some amazing improvements to city design.

[-] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I agree that the US actually needs more public transport. Fatalities aside, that’s often going to be the best solution for congestion and climate change. Congestion alone in SF is still a fucking nightmare. SF is small as fuck, but driving across that town between 3 and 7pm can take 1-2 hours.

As a local, I feel like the current state of MUNI, BART, CalTrans, AC Transit, and cycling are not going to be a good fit for EVERY single use case. If I’m injured, am carrying bulky stuff, or am trying to hit up a part of town that would take too long with public transport, an AV EV could be a good solution.

I usually try to avoid cars in SF. They’re often more trouble than they’re worth. But, there are times, IMHO, when cars solve a current route and use case better than alternative solutions. And it if they’re still going to be used for certain use cases, it would be nice if they killed fewer people.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

If I’m injured, am carrying bulky stuff, or am trying to hit up a part of town that would take too long with public transport, an AV EV could be a good solution.

Why not a car share instead? Or just an Uber?

[-] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago

Because the goal is to have an Uber that removes human error.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

I'd say this article shows that error is still a problem.

[-] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

It very much is, but the errors are different. An AV isn’t going to get distracted by their phone, by an argument, by rubbernecking, etc. But an AV might encounter something that the sensor AI is confused by, and the cars might Mitch McConnell themselves in the middle of the road. So far at-fault accidents are way down with the AVs, but stalls are way up.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Thank you, that at least is a good argument.

[-] joshhsoj1902@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

Driverless cars could really help solve the "last mile" issue in many transit systems.

I dislike taking transit because I have to take one unpredictable bus from my house to the train, take the train the majority of the distance, then take another unpredictable bus to my destination.

The issue of infrequent buses through neighborhoods isn't going to be solved anytime soon. But if I could take an electric driverless car from my house to the train I would be a lote more likely to take public transit over just taking my existing car.

[-] bobman@unilem.org -2 points 1 year ago

US will never stop using cars in the foreseeable future.

There may be an argument for major cities, but not for the rest of the nation.

That said, it's way safer driving outside of major cities. Fewer pedestrians, fewer cars, more space. It's also more efficient.

Saying "get away from cars" just screams to me that you live in a major city and think life outside of one doesn't matter.

[-] Aux@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

You forget one thing, only 17% of the US population live in a rural setting. A huge majority lives in the cities and don't really need a car. The rest of the nation doesn't matter, they can have their cars if 83% switch to something else.

[-] bobman@unilem.org 1 points 1 year ago

I'm not forgetting anything, lol.

Yes, city people can transition to a mostly car-less life.

[-] BackOnMyBS@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago

San Francisco is a major city

[-] bobman@unilem.org -2 points 1 year ago
this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2023
291 points (96.8% liked)

News

23296 readers
1415 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS