Post #1217313

Replies (2)

• @ivan@possum.city 2026-04-03 16:10

  @root Yeah also because trains normally have drivers who can be held accountable :p

  Open ##1217335

• @flesh@transfem.social 2026-04-03 14:51

  @root@possum.city The thing with self driving cars is they're personal transport. "The user needs to steer and pay attention to the road the whole time" is a genuine drawback of cars, so removing that need is an understandable goal. Buses are mass transport, they require the work of one driver, explicitly employed for this purpose, to transport large quantities of people. The users do not need to drive themselves, so self-driving capacity can only serve to either aid the driver (unlikely, questionable necessity) or serve to remove the need for a driver. And the driver is really not the problematic part of a bus. A bus still needs to be maintained and fueled. Not to mention it needs to be purchased/manufactured in the first place, which itself is costly. So while not needing a driver saves on the cost of a driver, the bus is still rather costly to operate. Not to mention, ya know, the whole self-driving system is gonna cost some money. So there is no value proposition to users, basically no value proposition to the drivers, the only alleged value it has is making the driver unnecessary, which is frankly not good value if you're not some kind of robber baron.

  Open ##1217337