>>1034285>to the point that traffic won't increase trip times as it does currently.If more people than its capacity are trying to use a road, not everyone will be able to fit. Bad drivers can sometimes make it worse, but they're not what's causing it.
>Urban centers will install central parking lots that cars can self-park in after dropping passengers off, reducing unnecessary "empty" travelWhy can't we do that now? That has absolutely nothing to do with who's driving. And having them all in a central lot would mean more empty driving because it's farther away.
>Autonomous ride-sharing fleets will also reduce the volume of vehicles on the road and in parking lots, and increase the viability of rail for inter-city travel and major intra-city routes.It'll make driving easier, and for some reason you think that will make people want to drive less?
>Extended range will exist for people who need to make long, uninterrupted drives. Regular electric will be sufficient for commutersSo they have to buy a second car if they ever want to go more than a few miles away? Why not just get the extended range one from the beginning? What if there's heavy traffic or a snow storm or detour and they need to spend more time driving than they were expecting?
>Autonomous driving brings one of the major advantages of public transit to private transit, without the extra walking, route navigation, waiting for a bus/train, and extra stops.So no one will use public transit any more, making the traffic worse and people who can't afford a car won't be able to go anywhere (or get a job somewhere other than their neighborhood which everyone else will be trying to work in too so they can earn the money to buy one)
Do you have some sort of brain damage? Nothing you said makes any sense and all your points support the other side. You very clearly have no idea what you're talking about.
