Driverless taxis

[Sue]

16 hours ago, malumbu said:

So when your life is saved by a surgeon with the help of AI are you going to think the same?

Seem to be a lot of luddites on this forum 

The use of robots to do certain types of surgery still needs somebody to operate (sorry can't think of another word)  them, albeit at a distance,  so I'm not  sure how they are going to replace human surgeons?

And what happens if they find something unexpected when they have made the incision?

There must be something I'm missing, because I can't see how using robots is going to reduce NHS waiting list times?

 

[malumbu]

AI is already improving diagnostics.  Dunno about robots 😊

[Penguin68]

27 minutes ago, Sue said:

There must be something I'm missing, because I can't see how using robots is going to reduce NHS waiting list times?

I think robots offer two benefits. Firstly they do not tire, which means a competent surgeon can oversee them with far less physical exhaustion, allowing for a larger work load (and the surgeon can be remote). And secondly robots can operate key hole operations where the recovery time is much shorter, clearing beds and wards for reuse. 

[alice]

Driverless taxis in London? that is not going to happen. Maybe more recent stats will show the accident rate has improved but right now it’s twice that a human driven cars. USA has broad Street Roads are there any European countries with a similar city road layout that use them?

[march46]

This piece makes some interesting points about the potential impacts of driverless vehicles on pedestrians. 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jun/12/driverless-cars-pedestrians-second-class-citizens

[malumbu]

Didn't really get the point of the article.  I thought he'd be keen on less cars parked on our streets as many, particularly in urban areas, will see see the benefit of summoning a driverless vehicle, ultimately an autonomous pod,  to take them to their destination, including transport hubs.

 

 

[Insuflo]

1 hour ago, malumbu said:

many, particularly in urban areas, will see see the benefit of summoning a driverless vehicle, ultimately an autonomous pod,  to take them to their destination, including transport hubs.

 

 

What this town needs is a monorail! Yesiree!

[rjsmall]

18 hours ago, Insuflo said:

What this town needs is a monorail! Yesiree!

That's more of a Shelbyville idea.

[FellbriggSam]

I've used Waymo's driverless cars in the US while on work trips, and honestly, they feel so much safer than a human driver and the ride is smoother too. I really hope they bring them to London.

[Penguin68]

That would be MADNESS. London streets are built around walking and bicycles (and horses!) - they are narrow, winding and with many intersections. They are not laid out on a simple grid as are US streets, nor are they as wide as US streets. Pedestrians are not restricted from crossing them, or walking on them with Jay walking laws as in the US. The AI that works in the US simply is not fit for purpose on London, or indeed most other European towns or cities. 

[exdulwicher]

10 minutes ago, Penguin68 said:

That would be MADNESS. London streets are built around walking and bicycles (and horses!) - they are narrow, winding and with many intersections. They are not laid out on a simple grid as are US streets, nor are they as wide as US streets. Pedestrians are not restricted from crossing them, or walking on them with Jay walking laws as in the US. The AI that works in the US simply is not fit for purpose on London, or indeed most other European towns or cities. 

I find myself in the wholly unfamiliar situation of agreeing 100% with something that Penguin has written! 😉

I think they're an answer to a largely non-existent problem but because politicians and big industry like answers that involve "technology" and especially the exciting sounding "AI", the trials are almost an inevitability.

And the last thing London (or indeed most cities) needs is yet more cars cruising around and around waiting for fares. 

[Spartacus]

As I started this thread with "potential for job loses", it also is a case of politically shotting oneself in the foot as with no work taxi drivers won't pay taxes ans potentially will add to the benefits bill. 

AI is useful but we should be careful before jumping on the "it can replace workers" bandwagon.

[malumbu]

11 hours ago, exdulwicher said:

I find myself in the wholly unfamiliar situation of agreeing 100% with something that Penguin has written! 😉

I think they're an answer to a largely non-existent problem but because politicians and big industry like answers that involve "technology" and especially the exciting sounding "AI", the trials are almost an inevitability.

And the last thing London (or indeed most cities) needs is yet more cars cruising around and around waiting for fares. 

It's about smarter transport, supply meeting demand and joined up between the different modes including active travel 

Historical protectionism of black could be highly inefficient. Others may wish to comment on Uber and minicabs 

Edited Sunday at 21:12 by malumbu