Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
So dumb. https://sfbike.org/news/the-sf-bicycle-coalitions-stance-on-robotaxi-expansion/ https://www.cdc.gov/transportationsafety/bicycle/index.html
8 replies
0 recast
17 reactions
GIGAMΞSH
@gigamesh
Hard for me to see how AVs won’t lead to a much wider backlash. Pedestrians, cyclists & other drivers can communicate with human drivers but AVs can only report people for not giving them the right-of-way. Most people likely won’t unless forced to, so leads to surveillance state with every AV as a robo cop. 🤔
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Dan
@dberg
I would much rather bike next to an AV than a human driver. People from A16Z begging cities not to build public transit bc of AVs are doing themselves a disservice though. An AV is still a car, and cars take up way too much space in cities. Ideal city has 90% of trips on transit or bikes, AVs can take the rest.
1 reply
0 recast
5 reactions
Colin Johnson 💭
@cojo.eth
@survey should we be moving cars out of cities?
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
Joey Roth | Dyad
@joeyroth
this is also why “environmentalists” generally oppose nuclear if they were outcome-oriented rather than signaling-oriented they would be builders rather than activists
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Canada
@canada
We didn't quite catch the name of the disease related to bicycle accidents - it will be very interesting to see what medication will be recommended for prevention of such...
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
kevin
@kevinoconnell
i mean sure there are safety concerns from AV but there also are from human drivers - that are way worse (ex. drunk driving) that logic is pretty dumb to me imo
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Dave Bean
@bean
Just wait until they hear about all the issues caused by human drivers
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
timdaub
@timdaub.eth
I‘m pretty sure the cyclists have a legit point here (as they always have in these cases) because one small error will cost them there life
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
