# How hopeful are you that the future will be much better?



## united4ever (18 Mar 2021)

With regards to cycle infrastructure and mainstream participation etc? Do you think London will follow Paris's lead and get close to banning cars, will LTNs be kept once this 18 month trial is up? But more broadly do you think things will be much better in a decade or so?

I have moments where I think there is a cultural shift but am aware that my views, news sources and friends are all like minded so maybe I am in a great echo chamber. What do you think then in a decade....worse, better or same?


----------



## Slick (18 Mar 2021)

Won't be the step change most of us would hope for but it will be better. I still feel it would be criminal to let it even get back to where it was before lockdown.


----------



## HMS_Dave (18 Mar 2021)

I think eventually in the long term when cars drive themselves and we all just sit listening to commercials in Johnny Cab.


----------



## mjr (18 Mar 2021)

HMS_Dave said:


> I think eventually in the long term when cars drive themselves and we all just sit listening to commercials in Johnny Cab.


But will Johnny really be voiced by the holographic doctor from Star Trek?


----------



## classic33 (19 Mar 2021)

Similar question was asked on C+, 15 years ago. Locally there's been no real difference in those Years.

Many schemes have gone through early planning, but never been followed through. A couple of major disasters, Leeds to Bradford superhighway being the best known.


----------



## dutchguylivingintheuk (19 Mar 2021)

Unless they spend all that money on better infrastructure, coordinated, usefull and consistanly i don't see much change in 15 years or 30 for that matter.
What i mean is that every sinle council, borough council, county council of whatever you got more seems to have their own approach, wich means for example if i want to go from village 1 to city 2 passing city 2a and villages 1a, 3d and 4 i have to switch roads, have a wide dedicate cycle lne in the arrow and a narrow, flooded with tree,branches and mcdonalds path on the other and something in between by many many more. alsio with a little bit of rain or snow lots of paths are inaccessible, because there either flooded or to muddy to drive with a normal cycle, why do councils hate tarmac on route XX's so much?


----------



## contadino (19 Mar 2021)

My perspective is that of a leisure cyclist - if I need to go shopping, I walk into town (zombie apocalypse notwithstanding) and I work at home anyway.

Around here there have been a few good improvements in cycling infrastructure and there's no denying that the development of the eBike and folding bike markets has led to an increase in cycle use.

However, each year drivers are more aggressive and abuse of cyclists is now mainstream. The council can't do anything without getting ranted at and abused. My neighbour manages public consultations and was telling me that restraining orders and police intervention is now normal on every project. All of which serves to slow the pace of change down to a standstill. We live in a time when having a tantrum trumps due process.


----------



## Darius_Jedburgh (19 Mar 2021)

I'm not emotely interested in what goes on in London. The self centred oicks are little better than the pillocks in Brussels in their thinking that the country revolves around them.


----------



## annedonnelly (19 Mar 2021)

I think, at least locally, that there will be some improvements. Northumberland CC seem pretty determined about their carbon-zero plan which includes a lot of sustainable travel options.

I'm hoping that as drivers are forced to change to electric vehicles they'll not have a version with a loud, impressive exhaust which might take some of the fun out of racing around the place in the evening. Though I expect you'll be able to buy after market gadgets to make the noise for you.


----------



## weareHKR (19 Mar 2021)

Darius_Jedburgh said:


> I'm not emotely interested in what goes on in London. The self centred oicks are little better than the pillocks in Brussels in their thinking that the country revolves around them.


----------



## Drago (19 Mar 2021)

Change will be slow, but it will happen. Following 2030 car numbers will start to dwindle - not only are there insufficient materials to replace every ICE car one for one with a battery car, that relative rarity will elevate prices beyond the reach of many. In addition, most other western markets will be scrabbling for those same resources, further elevating prices.

Whether or not national or local government does anything to make cycling more appealing and more mainstream is uncertain. However, the end of the age of the motor car as king is now within view, as is the end of unfettered, unrestricted personal car use. With seriously reduced car numbers and a proportionately higher number of cyclists the government will be forced to start giving us some consideration as a user group. Hell, I may even live to see it.

As for London, there is a significant proportion of londoners that would sooner sit in a car for 40 minutes than walk for 10. Hell, in greater Manchester the average car journey is now less than 1 kilometer (yes, 1000 metres, 1200 odd lazy, casual paces) distance and I don't suppose Larndon is far behind. The future of London is in the hands of its own people and their own outlook and motivation - what happens there will be down to them and no one else.

The whole LTN thing is a joke. Not the concept itself, but the manner in which it is being considered. When trying to reduce crime the police aren't forced to take into account the views of bank robbers. When fighting cancer the scientists aren't forced to take into account the views of the Marlboro Man. Yet one of the factors determining the success, and the ongoing existence or otherwise, of LTN's is a public consultation involving the views of motorists, the very people causing the congestion, the pollution and the danger. It's madness - they are the disease, yet they are being allowed so much influence over the cure.

Don't vote in twits for mayors, eschew the car, start riding bicycles. Simple really, and it always has been. This idea that the future relies on government schemes of various sorts is rubbish - it'll change when Londoners _really _want it to, and not a moment sooner.


----------



## Baldy (19 Mar 2021)

Can't say I give a toss what happens in London, I don't live there. As far the rest of Britain I very much doubt much will change.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (19 Mar 2021)

It needs to become considerable unwoke to drive and own a car. Until the wokists wake up to this. Nothing will change.


----------



## Baldy (19 Mar 2021)

Unwoke, Wokest, Qu'est-ce que c'est?


----------



## Milkfloat (19 Mar 2021)

Seeing as nothing has really changed over the last 30 years except for a little bit of generally crappy infrastructure and an increase in irate drivers I don't predict anything revolutionary in the next 30 years. I am sure a little bit of noise will be made by politicians but fundamentally the funding will not be made available and attitudes will not change.

Proper self driving cars are miles away (pardon the pun) from reality and even then it will take decades for normal cars to be driven off the roads.


----------



## sheddy (19 Mar 2021)

Unfortunately we have fat media and bid businesses who are still actively lobbying to sell lies to a carcentric population.


----------



## IaninSheffield (19 Mar 2021)

In order to look forward, perhaps it helps to first look back?
In the decade to 2019, trends have been rather mixed (PDF - DfT Walking and Cycling Statistics, England: 2019): average number of miles cycled is increasing, although number of trips is decreasing; fewer children are cycling to school; number of fatalities & serious injuries amongst cyclists is increasing.
These are gentle trends rather than significant ones; as @Drago observed, change appears to be slow. Also, as others have already observed, the figures would seem to vary significantly according to region/locality. And of course the figures which contribute to the above precede any shifts which have emerged in the last 12 months.

We could then consider some of the drivers of change which are becoming more prominent now than might have been in the past:

climate change imperatives leading to shifts in policy (need to improve air quality, congestion charging, 'taxation' of high emissions etc)
changes in motoring - increasing autonomy in vehicle function (HT @HMS_Dave), shift away from ICE (HT @Drago)
increasing prevalence and acceptance of ebikes
Cyclescheme (Bike 2 Work scheme)
increasing cycle share schemes (_not always with success, and only in urban areas of course_)
wider appointment of 'cycling' commissioners such as Chris Boardman & Lee Craigie (_could be seen as paying no more than lip-service, or one more nudge in the right direction_)
And others may arise from what we have learnt in the past 12 months e.g. Boris' £2b cycling and walking revolution. However, I can't escape the feeling this all seems rather piecemeal and lacks the impetus of a national strategy which grabs the bull by the bar ends, in the same way the Dutch did in the 70s


View: https://youtu.be/XuBdf9jYj7o


I'm not sure there's the same desire here in the UK right now that there was in the Netherlands back then. But perhaps perceptions are shifting?

How hopeful am I that the future will be much better?
Better? Yes, guardedly hopeful.
Much better? Not so much, at least not within a decade.


----------



## mjr (19 Mar 2021)

Drago said:


> When fighting cancer the scientists aren't forced to take into account the views of the Marlboro Man.


Maybe not scientists, but maybe politicians should be: original Marlboro Man Bob Norris quit in disgust at the effect of his ads on children and contributed to anti-smoking campaigns. Norris never smoked, while one of his successors, Wayne McLaren, did and then starred in an anti-smoking ad from his hospital bed.

It's one of those ironic tales, like Marcel Renault dying racing cars and his brother Louis banning the company from motor racing (but eventually losing control by dying in prison in dodgy cirumstances awaiting trial for collaborating with the Nazis - there are some seriously unethical people in car production).


----------



## IaninSheffield (19 Mar 2021)

Dogtrousers said:


> What I suspect this is likely to result in is a change in ownership. Rather than sinking capital into a car for exclusive use people will be paying at the time of use for transport services from someone - either car sharing or an Uber type model. A bit like the fact that no company sinks capital into datacentres any more.
> 
> Whether this will result in more cycling or not I have no idea.


You may be right, but do people/individuals apply the same logics as businesses do? Are they driven by similar goals?


----------



## swee'pea99 (19 Mar 2021)

Meanwhile back in True Blue-land...







_"When the lane was removed, the local authority cited local opposition as the reason, even though this turned out to be emails from 322 residents, or 0.2% of the borough’s population.

A subsequent poll, commissioned by Khan’s office, found 56% of borough residents backed the lane, against 30% who opposed it. Business and organisations based in the borough, including Imperial College London, the Albert Hall, and Peter Jones, have called for the lane to return."_

But no. The council has decided on a feasibility study. AKA kick it into the long grass till all the fuss dies down...


----------



## sheddy (19 Mar 2021)

I think Cambridge are planning driverless minibuses, running very frequently on demand along bus routes.


----------



## mjr (19 Mar 2021)

sheddy said:


> I think Cambridge are planning driverless minibuses, running very frequently on demand along bus routes.


Cambridgeshire Autonomous Metro. Most things I've seen say it'll be tunnelled under the city centre, which seems a bit of an expensive choice in such a notoriously wet lowland. Also, buses are planned to use at least some of the current busways but the proposed tunnel uses a different guidance system. All rather odd to me and some suggest bi-mode battery-electric trolleybuses would make more sense.

Anyway, it has the backing of their mayor so maybe is more likely to happen than the much cheaper and more beneficial out-of-city cycleways.


----------



## dutchguylivingintheuk (19 Mar 2021)

IaninSheffield said:


> I'm not sure there's the same desire here in the UK right now that there was in the Netherlands back then. But perhaps perceptions are shifting?
> 
> How hopeful am I that the future will be much better?
> Better? Yes, guardedly hopeful.
> Much better? Not so much, at least not within a decade.


I wish there was but i don't think that change is coming anytime soon, what i see around me is too less to late and made designed by people who are unlikely to ever use it themselves. Which leads to a cycle lane that merges with a 2 lane 70mph road for example, and if that was because they would be no space you could argue something like '' they needed to do something etc.'; but it's not probably after an x amount of yards it no longer their problem because it is an other council/county council whatever. 
That also a difference with the Netherlands, watermanagement, roads etc. are all controlled by one government body.(and i'm in general not a favor of a big goverment but it this example it works really well.)


----------



## mjr (19 Mar 2021)

dutchguylivingintheuk said:


> probably after an x amount of yards it no longer their problem because it is an other council/county council whatever.


Oh I know far too many examples of that. In London, most cycle routes that stray onto a road controlled by Kensington Borough downgrade abruptly. In the West Midlands, there's an OK-but-not-great cycleway along the A429 that dumps you back onto the wrong side of the road at the Warwickshire boundary, although it looks like they have at least extended the 30mph limit since the first time I rode it, making it marginally easier not to get squished as you merge across by a motorist approaching from over your left shoulder. https://showmystreet.com/#v6a85_-xh27_77.a_-af43



> That also a difference with the Netherlands, watermanagement, roads etc. are all controlled by one government body.(and i'm in general not a favor of a big goverment but it this example it works really well.)


But then there's Belgium, which is almost as good for cycling (but not quite) and such things in Flanders are currently controlled by a cluster fark of 2300ish government bodies (consolidation into I think 17 was agreed a week or two ago). I think they've done it by making their Cycling/Road Design handbook compulsory by law and having a regulator slapping roads authorities silly if they deviate too far. That could happen in England, with Active Travel England as the slapper, but we still don't know whether it will or not... here's hoping!


----------



## mickle (19 Mar 2021)

Cycling infra is a total red herring. We've a nationwide system of roads, perfectly good enough for cycling. The problem is that we are obliged to share it with drivers of motor vehicles. The answer, in my view, is not to marginalise cyclists into their own (incomplete, poorly designed, poorly maintained) ghetto of cycling facilities, it's to exclude or restrict motor vehicles. Slow em down, introduce presumed liability, firmly enforce existing laws and, when the opportunity arises, redesign roads and junctions to prioritise the safe passage of peds and pedallers. If we wait for a parallel cycling network which covers the whole county we'll be waiting forever. Literally forever.


----------



## mjr (19 Mar 2021)

mickle said:


> Cycling infra is a total red herring. We've a nationwide system of roads, perfectly good enough for cycling. The problem is that we are obliged to share it with drivers of motor vehicles. The answer, in my view, is not to marginalise cyclists into their own (incomplete, poorly designed, poorly maintained) ghetto of cycling facilities, it's to exclude or restrict motor vehicles. Slow em down, introduce presumed liability, firmly enforce existing laws and, when the opportunity arises, redesign roads and junctions to prioritise the safe passage of peds and pedallers. If we wait for a parallel cycling network which covers the whole county we'll be waiting forever. Literally forever.


Ah, the good old "parallel cycling network which covers the whole count[r]y" myth. No. No-one is waiting for or expecting that any time soon. Excluding or restricting motor vehicles is a fine way to make existing roads acceptable cycling infrastructure. I'm all in favour of that. It's what they do in the Netherlands: I think more than half of my first cycling tour in the Netherlands was done on motor-restricted roads rather than specific cycleways.

But it's a tough slog: I asked for some on-road parts of NCN1 to be closed at one end to motorists. Officially, Norfolk County Council are still considering it, something like 2 years later. I'm not sure whether delaying is a way to avoid yet another formal complaint (or worse, if Cycling UK feel like dragging NCC to court like they are West Sussex), or whether officers are hoping the politicians might approve it after the elections which have been delayed to this year.

If we start getting success restricting roads anywhere, then I've a stack of ideas for some that should be demotorised (no-through-motors or residents/access only for sections) and prioritised for cycling: Dereham Lane/Road from Easton near Norwich through Dereham to Dunham; Banbury Lane from Northampton to Banbury; Akeman Street from Bicester to Cirencester (where extant); Welsh Way from Fairford to Cirencester; and so on...

But I also think we probably have to accept that A roads dominated by high-speed motorists (what used to be trunk roads, basically) probably will need cycleways alongside where they're useful to cyclists. That is affordable, less than £3bn to do the whole country was the estimate a few years ago.

We probably need to use the whole toolbox. Encouragement alone never worked. I don't think only law changes and minimal junction redesigns will work either. Even cycleways alone will never work, as correctly stated above. Is there the stomach to get these tools out nationally? I don't know. If not now, then when?


----------



## Drago (19 Mar 2021)

The government should work out how many gazillions have been spent on scrappage schemes, grants towards the purchase of battery cars, etc, and devote the same about to buying new bicycles for those that want to cycle.


----------



## Mike Ayling (20 Mar 2021)

Drago said:


> The government should work out how many gazillions have been spent on scrappage schemes, grants towards the purchase of battery cars, etc, and devote the same about to buying new bicycles for those that want to cycle.


Hear Hear, preferably the 9,000 quid jobbies!


----------



## mjr (20 Mar 2021)

Drago said:


> The government should work out how many gazillions have been spent on scrappage schemes, grants towards the purchase of battery cars, etc, and devote the same about to buying new bicycles for those that want to cycle.


The Bicycle Association called for zero VAT on bikes and parts, and grants for ebikes. https://road.cc/content/news/industry-calls-no-vat-bikes-subsidies-e-bikes-273329

I would also like to see "ecotap" charging points in every town (so ebikes can survive with smaller batteries, so lighter, so greener) and grants for cargo bikes, trailers and so on that are conditional on putting it on a spinlister-style site so neighbours can hire it easily.


----------



## icowden (21 Mar 2021)

Milkfloat said:


> Proper self driving cars are miles away (pardon the pun) from reality and even then it will take decades for normal cars to be driven off the roads.



Er... 

https://www.tesmanian.com/blogs/tesmanian-blog/tesla-full-self-driving-release-in-2021

Yes - thats Stage 5 Self Driving. Fully autonomous. Requiring no human input.

Now he was saying they were close by the end of 2020, and Elon is known to underestimate the time it takes to do things but... miles away? Nope.
Once the bans on ICE cars come in from 2030 onwards, I think we will see "normal" cars disappearing quite quickly. Plus if it becomes cheaper to summon an autonomous car than to pay for your own car, car ownership will fall dramatically. It becomes a luxury for those who really want it.


----------



## Gunk (21 Mar 2021)

icowden said:


> Yes - thats Stage 5 Self Driving. Fully autonomous. Requiring no human input.



That is a truly frightening prospect


----------



## icowden (21 Mar 2021)

Gunk said:


> That is a truly frightening prospect


I can see why you might think that, but you do have to balance it with the fact that an AI can't get drunk, angry, testosterone fuelled etc. It has faster reactions and a much better attitude to safety. So - swings and roundabouts.


----------



## DRM (21 Mar 2021)

icowden said:


> I can see why you might think that, but you do have to balance it with the fact that an AI can't get drunk, angry, testosterone fuelled etc. It has faster reactions and a much better attitude to safety. So - swings and roundabouts.



View: https://youtu.be/8Jlo5C8ydb4

The video above is nearly 6 years old, notice that the trucks have no damage on them, no scratches, no blue scrapes of paint where they've hit Chep pallets, so the old adage that for a moving vehicle most of the collisions are caused by the nut that holds the steering is true, it's not much of a leap forward to make an autonomous car, which are now well developed, the good thing is that the computer controlling the car doesn't read the Daily Wail, and have an irrational hatred of cyclists.


----------



## rogerzilla (21 Mar 2021)

Worse. This is a spectacularly fat and lazy country with a huge motoring lobby, and a planning system that has resulted in car-dependent housing estates.


----------



## DRM (21 Mar 2021)

The car adverts are laughable, look at this lovely new car, being driven on a totally empty road, when in reality it should be shown stuck in a jam, then eventually the jam clears as it's driven at excess speed 6 inches from the car in front because the traffic has made me late (occupant fails to realize they are the traffic) and this idiot in front has the audacity to drive within the speed limit/laws.
Everywhere in Britain seems to have out of town shopping that's only accessible by car, supermarkets did a marvelous job of killing town center's and again are car friendly, not bike or pedestrian, we really have got ourselves tied in knots with the car, and how it's used, it's viewed as a right, not a privilege, and a status symbol, not a tool to do a job


----------



## Milkfloat (21 Mar 2021)

icowden said:


> Er...
> 
> https://www.tesmanian.com/blogs/tesmanian-blog/tesla-full-self-driving-release-in-2021
> 
> ...



Whatever the Tesla fan boy press says, they are a long way from full autonomy, they need far too much human input to be level 5. Don’t get me wrong, they are doing very well, but not level 5 well, still too many hurdles to overcome.


----------



## keithmac (21 Mar 2021)

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2018/03/19/technology/uber-driverless-fatality.amp.html


----------



## icowden (22 Mar 2021)

keithmac said:


> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2018/03/19/technology/uber-driverless-fatality.amp.html



Yep:-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-50484172

A driverless car was being tested, the safety operator was streaming a movie and the pedestrian was crossing in an unsafe area. Lots of fault all round.
Your point is?


----------



## icowden (22 Mar 2021)

Milkfloat said:


> Whatever the Tesla fan boy press says, they are a long way from full autonomy,



Not the press. Tesla. The Technoking of Tesla. And "a long way" depends on your definition of "a long way". 
Personally I think it'll be here quicker than we all think.


----------



## Milkfloat (22 Mar 2021)

icowden said:


> Not the press. Tesla. The Technoking of Tesla. And "a long way" depends on your definition of "a long way".
> Personally I think it'll be here quicker than we all think.


My company produces map data for a large percentage of these vehicles and processes huge amounts of their sensor data. True level 5 is at least 10 years away. Their might be claims otherwise, but for sure you won’t be summoning a car, getting in for a snooze and waking up at your destination for a long time.


----------



## Archie_tect (22 Mar 2021)

icowden said:


> I can see why you might think that, but you do have to balance it with the fact that an AI can't get drunk, angry, testosterone fuelled etc. It has faster reactions and a much better attitude to safety. So - swings and roundabouts.


They'll be tops at roundabouts.


----------



## byegad (22 Mar 2021)

icowden said:


> Er...
> 
> https://www.tesmanian.com/blogs/tesmanian-blog/tesla-full-self-driving-release-in-2021
> 
> ...


Yes and No. 
In sizable cities summoning a car, self driving or taxi, is and will be quite quick.
In rural areas and smaller towns, forget it. If you live 20 miles from a big city and want to go shopping, the bus will be faster than summoning a ride. Faster yet will be to continue to own car.


----------



## Archie_tect (22 Mar 2021)

When the sensors on my car get dirty, obscured by snow or too wet in heavy rain, they stop working so that the adaptive cruise control, parking assist and the emergency braking functions don't work. I can see many self drive issues with poorly maintained cars just stopping wherever they happen to be on default safe mode.

Best laid plans...


----------



## byegad (22 Mar 2021)

mickle said:


> Cycling infra is a total red herring. We've a nationwide system of roads, perfectly good enough for cycling. The problem is that we are obliged to share it with drivers of motor vehicles. The answer, in my view, is not to marginalise cyclists into their own (incomplete, poorly designed, poorly maintained) ghetto of cycling facilities, it's to exclude or restrict motor vehicles. Slow em down, introduce presumed liability, firmly enforce existing laws and, when the opportunity arises, redesign roads and junctions to prioritise the safe passage of peds and pedallers. If we wait for a parallel cycling network which covers the whole county we'll be waiting forever. Literally forever.


Here in County Durham the money so far spent on 'cycling farcilities' is largely wasted, merely serving to allow drivers to baulk at cyclists ignoring the cycle path, which is strewn with debris and festooned with terrible Give Ways at every private drive and constantly diverting cyclist over main roads at random for no good reason.
Quite how we educate drivers to see us as part of the traffic, given how they don't see themselves in that light, I don't know.


----------



## HMS_Dave (22 Mar 2021)

Archie_tect said:


> When the sensors on my car get dirty or wet they stop working so that the adaptive cruise control, parking assist and the emergency braking functions don't work. I can see many self drive issues with poorly maintained cars just stopping wherever they happen to be on default safe mode.


In terms of car maintenance things are going to be a lot more expensive in the future. A lot of these systems are going to be locked with propriety copyrighted software which only the main stealers will have access to. Any local garage will likely dwindle down as the years go by turning into tyre fitters if they're lucky and maybe MOT test stations...


----------



## icowden (22 Mar 2021)

byegad said:


> In sizable cities summoning a car, self driving or taxi, is and will be quite quick.
> In rural areas and smaller towns, forget it. If you live 20 miles from a big city and want to go shopping, the bus will be faster than summoning a ride. Faster yet will be to continue to own car.



Which is why I said that the *majority* of people will no longer want to own a car - not all. 
You are *very *optimistic about the frequency of busses 20 miles from a city. My mum lives 7 miles from the centre of Worcester where there are 3 busses per day. It's about a 15-20 minute drive.

So that's a win for an autonomous car...


----------



## icowden (22 Mar 2021)

HMS_Dave said:


> In terms of car maintenance things are going to be a lot more expensive in the future.



But on the positive side, EVs need a lot less maintenance, so things will be *less* expensive being pretty much limited to tyres, brake pads (very occasionally) and filters.


----------



## Archie_tect (22 Mar 2021)

Autonomous taxis/ minibuses will replace timetabled service buses so that everyone has access- bit like hospital pick-ups now but loads more of them everywhere- using apps like Just Three Words to order, find and pick up with pay per mile charging on arrival. We won't need cars- lots more e-bikes, cargo e-bikes and e-trikes though for shop delivery and personal local transport... imagine everyone on mobility scooters!


----------



## HMS_Dave (22 Mar 2021)

icowden said:


> But on the positive side, EVs need a lot less maintenance, so things will be *less* expensive being pretty much limited to tyres, brake pads (very occasionally) and filters.


It absolutely should be. But big businesses love to throw a monopoly on their products and there is only one reason for that... I can see many a high profile court case in the future regarding this.


----------



## keithmac (22 Mar 2021)

icowden said:


> Yep:-
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-50484172
> 
> A driverless car was being tested, the safety operator was streaming a movie and the pedestrian was crossing in an unsafe area. Lots of fault all round.
> Your point is?



The car didn't see the pedestrian was my point, it's not infallible. What happens next time.

Given all the fancy technology they'll still run people over.


----------



## icowden (22 Mar 2021)

keithmac said:


> The car didn't see the pedestrian was my point, it's not infallible. What happens next time.



I understand that the early tests of Aeroplanes were problematic. The car was supposed to be being supervised. It was still learning. 
What happens is that the AI (and the company) learns from the mistake and doesn't repeat it.

In other news, human drivers killed 42,060 people in the USA alone in 2020. So the AI is winning that one, by some margin.


----------



## keithmac (22 Mar 2021)

icowden said:


> I understand that the early tests of Aeroplanes were problematic. The car was supposed to be being supervised. It was still learning.
> What happens is that the AI (and the company) learns from the mistake and doesn't repeat it.
> 
> In other news, human drivers killed 42,060 people in the USA alone in 2020. So the AI is winning that one, by some margin.



Apples and oranges there. How many self driven AI cars in the USA vs human.

I bet the lady that got run over is glad they've learnt from their mistake as you say, no doubt she's over the moon..


----------



## keithmac (22 Mar 2021)

There's been a discussion about fully driverless cars, I remembered the incident and posted a link incase people haven't heard about it. 

Some have got very defensive about the fatal accident.

I personally wouldn't want to be anywhere near a fully autonomous car but each to their own.


----------



## icowden (22 Mar 2021)

keithmac said:


> I personally wouldn't want to be anywhere near a fully autonomous car but each to their own.



I believe it took quite a while before most people would go near those new fangled aircraft.
Originally people thought that if women were to travel on a train their uterus would fly out.

New technology is always scary. Then it's commonplace.


----------



## keithmac (22 Mar 2021)

I suppose it's like Chernobyl, they'll get it right eventually.


----------



## cyberknight (22 Mar 2021)

Whats a cycle lane ?


----------



## mustang1 (22 Mar 2021)

Economies rely on growth. Cycling infrastructure, bikes, cyclists, just do not bring in the money that cars do. Road tax, petrol tax, wear and tear on roads, car servicing. All cyclists want to do is get the cheapest servicing, only ride when the weather is good, and mainly for recreation; that ain't gonna bring any money in, nothing on the scale that car/road infrastructure does.

You may say (something like) "yeah but with cyclists going slowly through towns, there has been rejuvenation. Yeah, maybe a tiny bit.

If cyclists get taxed, registered, require mandatory insurance, have MOT stations for bikes, things like that, even then it wont bring the kind of money cars can generate. Body shops, paintshops, customising, more powerful engines or motors, so many more parts that wear out. 

Whatever wears out on a bike? The brake pads (£10), the chain and cassette (£50).

Having said that, bikes are getting more expensive and probably PCP schemes will be introduced: a 3 year deal including maintenance contract, mandatory insurance, GAP insurance, "free MOT" and low interest finance might get things moving though.


----------



## Drago (25 Mar 2021)

It wouldn't bring in any money, because most would then simply not cycle and the few that do would take their chances.


----------



## matticus (25 Mar 2021)

mustang1 said:


> Economies rely on growth. Cycling infrastructure, bikes, cyclists, just do not bring in the money that cars do.


And yet many other euro economies have decided having less cars and more cyclists is worth the small sacrifice to their economies. (Belgium and Denmark are hardly 3rd world countries.)

When we visit these places we mostly rave about how nice they are; and then come home and rant about new cycle lanes in our town.


----------



## TheDoctor (30 Mar 2021)

Humph. My local council is planning to remove some newly-installed cycle racks and put car parking back there instead. Bike parking for 24 bikes, to be replaced by parking for three cars. This in a town designed with a pretty good cycle network, although it's criminally poorly maintained these days.


----------



## slowmotion (31 Mar 2021)

icowden said:


> I believe it took quite a while before most people would go near those new fangled aircraft.
> Originally people thought that if women were to travel on a train their uterus would fly out.
> 
> New technology is always scary. Then it's commonplace.


Like Smart Motorways?


----------

