Life ain’t always beautiful, but it’s a beautiful ride. —Gary Allan
Driving a car has been part of the great American adventure, but soon our only choice may be to ride, not drive.
I remember quite distinctly my 16th birthday. Actually, I only remember a specific portion of the afternoon of my 16th birthday. Poppa picked me up from school and drove me over to the DMV in Muskogee for my driving test. I had already passed the written test in Driver’s Ed. Now, it was time to take that monumental step. I was nervous. Some of my classmates had to take the test multiple times before passing. Not me. Â I aced that test on the first try and was excited to show off the horrible picture on my new license. I would no longer have to ask for a ride every time I needed to go somewhere.
By contrast, my 18-year-old son is quite comfortable in the passenger seat. Even though age-wise, he’s been eligible to get his driver’s license for two years, he’s still in no hurry. He’s quite content to get a ride from his mom or his brother. As it turns out, his attitude may be the better approach for the future.
By now, I’m just going to assume that everyone is at least topically familiar with the development of driverless cars, especially Google’s various models. The concept still scares us a bit. For example, what happens if/when an automated car hits a pedestrian? There are still issues to be worked out, but the further development of the vehicles seems inevitable. Even car manufacturers such as Audi are getting in on the act. The day may soon come when all one has to do is get in a car and ride.
Complications Are Inevitable
As automated cars begin to fill the streets, though, other things beyond cars have to change as well. Streets, for example. Just this past week, solar powered roads started their first real-life test on Route 66 near Conway, MO. With so much of the nation’s asphalt and concrete infrastructure crumbling, now seems to be a good time to start modifying the nation’s roadways so that they might better accommodate driverless cars. Sounds reasonable, doesn’t it? Most voters would likely go along for that ride.
A general assumption is that most automated cars will see primary use on freeways and Interstates where access by pedestrians is either restricted or prohibited. There, in a space designed for cars, automated vehicles already accel and are a safer ride than being in a human-driven vehicle. Again, it sounds like good news, given that traffic deaths spiked the highest last year since 1965. We’re actually becoming worse at driving.
Automated cars in urban situations, though, have not been as thoroughly tested. We assume they would be better at navigating city streets efficiently, especially as they develop the ability to communicate with each other. Traffic signals may no longer be necessary as cars instinctively know when to stop or change course. Great, again, if you’re riding.
But what about pedestrians? How do automated cars know when an individual is crossing the street? Â What if a child’s ball bounces out into the road? Will an approaching car know to not only avoid the ball, but watch for the child that might be following?
Walking Days Are Numbered
An article in this week’s The Atlantic takes a fairly in-depth look at how the rise of automated cars may spell doom for pedestrians. The move isn’t unprecedented. Consider how many suburban neighborhoods already are void of sidewalks. I can personally speak to the number of places where walking simply isn’t safe. Not only are there no sidewalks, intersections are too wide to cross during the few seconds afforded by a traffic light. The danger is real now and doesn’t get any better.
One possibility is that crossing the street might require some form of digital transaction. Pedestrians might need a wearable device that communicates with either the cars or perhaps the street itself to negotiate the right to cross safely. Jaywalking, something largely ignored in cities like Indianapolis, would not only be illegal but life-threatening as well. Without that transaction, cars wouldn’t know to stop.
What if that transaction had a price? Would you pay to cross the street? In some scenarios, it might be easier, and safer, to summon a ride for a trip only a couple of blocks long rather than risk walking. There is also the chance that pedestrians would find themselves excluded from a high number of heavily-trafficked streets. The days of my walking to the nearest coffee shop would be over.
Driving Becomes Illegal
When automated cars become populous enough that they outnumber traditional cars, it only makes sense that, for safety reasons alone, driving becomes illegal. Automated cars make fewer mistakes and have the ability to communicate with each other at microsecond speed. People can’t do that. While technology might prohibit a driver from executing a dangerous move, sooner or later laws are going to change to favor the safer option. Your driving days are over.
One one level, that may not seem like such a sacrifice. No drivers mean no road rage, no getting stuck behind a slow driver in the fast lane, no one cutting you off at the last minute. However, driverless cars have a point A to point B purpose to them. There is no joyriding in a driverless car. One does not just go out for a leisurely ride through the park, or go exploring down a road they’ve never traveled. Instead, driverless cars are designed to take you to a specific destination using the most efficient route possible. Sit back and enjoy the ride, even if it’s the same ride you take very day. Say goodbye to any sense of adventure.
Social Issues
The Atlantic raises some rather important social issues as well. One dominant scenario has no one actually owning their own car, but rather using state-funded Uber-like services instead. This move to forced public transit would almost certainly disadvantage the poor and those whom society marginalizes. Roads have already been using to divide cities both economically and racially. When one’s only option for transportation is a city-sponsored automated car that won’t come closer than five blocks to your house, you have a problem.
The “right to ride” has to be insured as such programs develop. If individuals of the future are not allowed to drive their own cars or even own their own cars, the right to access transportation is one that has to be addressed to avoid it being used to further marginalize people.
There’s also the likelihood that, since automated cars will follow a software-type non-negotiable license, that car manufacturers will require permission to sell your travel data, just like Facebook and Google sell your online data now. This may not seem like a big deal until governments start using the data to limit where one can travel, or what time of day one can catch a ride.
 We Have Options
None of this means that a ride-only future is necessarily bleak. Pedestrian-only pathways could provide both a convenient and safer option for those who walk or ride a bike. Such trails are already popular, we just need more of them connecting every party of a city.
No-car-zones are already being considered in some places, such as Oslo. While the details of such an option would be unique to every location, it would provide some safety for those of us who prefer to walk across short distances.
Going for a ride is an experience that is going to change dramatically. Exactly how fast that change happens is anyone’s guess, but few are expecting the normal 20-year adaptation cycle to apply. This is a reality that is coming at us fast. We have to learn how to ride or else we may die walking.
Morning Update: 09/04/24
Every parent harbors an unspoken fear of something happening to their children. When that moment comes, or it possibly has come, one has to make a decision on how to react. G tested our response yesterday, though he was never in any real danger and arrived home without our help. The “unexpected adventure” started simply enough. “I’m going to explore more of bus route 15 since I have more time today,” was the text he sent me a little before 4:00 yesterday afternoon. I told him that was fine. Having a good knowledge of the bus route is never a bad thing. But then…
When the bus got to the end of the route, he got off. The next bus heading back into town wouldn’t be there for another hour. So, G decided to walk to the nearby Home Depot and explore there for a while. Not finding the store very stimulating, he decided to walk the bus route back, catching the bus at a different stop along the way. While walking along the route, though, he was struck by a sense of nostalgia as he remembered some of the neighborhoods from when his school bus went through them. He detoured to explore a little bit.
As he walked, G’s phone died. He looked around for a public place where he might plug in his charger for a minute, but he was surrounded by retail stores, none of which were conducive to finding an open outlet. He decided to keep walking. And walking.
I didn’t grow concerned until I stepped outside to start the grill for dinner, around 6:30. I sent him a message, but got no response. To some degree, that’s not unusual. G doesn’t live with his phone in front of his face like some teens do. He frequently misses messages completely. When he still wasn’t home and I hadn’t heard anything by 7:00, though, it was time to call Kat. We discussed our options for a moment. We didn’t want to overreact. Still, we both know that Indy’s not the safest place to walk. Over 100 pedestrians were hit on the streets here just in August. After talking it over for a while, Kat decided she’d head back in from Fishers to look for him. I planned to take the meat off the grill, put Hamilton in a harness, and start walking from this direction.
As I was about to take the meat off the grill, I looked up and saw G coming down the sidewalk. I called Kat to let her know that he was safe. G trotted the rest of the way home and jumped the front fence. He had walked the entire six-plus miles from the end of the bus route. He came in, plugged in his phone, called his mom, ate leftover tacos, and fell fast asleep. Our boy was safe. We breathed a sigh of relief.
By this point, Tipper was already asleep as well. I ate my dinner alone, watched a couple of short documentaries, and went to bed thankful that we hadn’t become a statistic in the number of families who lost children. We’re fortunate that G’s a sharp kid and keeps his wits about him even when a situation doesn’t go exactly as planned.
Not everyone’s day ends on a good note. Four people who were killed on a Chicago L train on Monday were likely asleep when they were shot at close range. A Mountain lion attacked a 5-year-old at a Southern California park. Boko Haram militants on motorcycles attacked a Nigerian village, killing over 100. An 11-Year-Old Is Charged in Killing of 82-Year-Old Ex-Mayor and His Daughter. An Ex-Doctor Pleads Guilty to Manslaughter in New York Woman’s Suicide. And all that is without considering those killed in continuing wars.
We know that the world is a violent place. We live with the hope that the violence stays away from us, but statistically, we’re all eventually victims in one form or another. None of us get out of here without harm coming to us. This is the reality of the human condition. No, it’s no worse now than it was 100 years ago. The mode and means have changed, but the world has always been like this. If nature isn’t trying to kill us, we’re trying to kill each other. The world has never been safe.
We’re not necessarily the smartest creatures on the planet, either. Another boat carrying several dozen people appears to be making another attempt to cross the English Channel seemingly to Britain from northern France just a day after 12 migrants died. An Oregon hospital was hit with a $303M lawsuit after a nurse was accused of replacing fentanyl with tap water. A Philadelphia woman who was driving a partially automated Mustang Mach-E was charged with DUI homicide.
We also fall for stupid shit.  Posts falsely claim video shows Harris promising to censor X and owner Elon Musk. China-linked ‘Spamouflage’ network mimics Americans online to sway US political debate. And Clearview AI was fined $33.7 million by a Dutch data protection watchdog over an ‘illegal database’ of faces.
I know you won’t take the time to click all those links. Hell, it’s rare that anyone double-checks me at all. Do you really trust me that much? Should you? I’ll keep providing the links because no one should take anyone at their word on important matters. That’s what allows us to get stuck with the stupidest of politicians in office.
Speaking of, the Times has an interesting conversation going on in their Opinion section this morning. David Brooks writes How Trump Wins (and Harris and the Democrats Blow It). Then, Ross Douthat counters with How Harris Wins (and Trump and the Republicans Blow It). Next, Thomas L. Friedman enters the fray with How Netanyahu Is Trying to Save Himself, Elect Trump, and Defeat Harris and Thomas B. Edsall winds matters up with Why Is the Presidential Election This Close? You’ll blow most of an hour reading all four pieces, but you’ll be better for doing so.
I wonder if any of us truly know what we’re doing. Maybe we’re fooling ourselves, creating an illusion of competency so that we’re not depressed by the depth of our inadequacy.
Or, maybe we just need more coffee.
Share this:
Like this: