I've not personally encountered these as they don't exist where I live, but I dislike them on principle. I think city councils need to be banning them. Sidewalks aren't for wheeled vehicles in the...
I've not personally encountered these as they don't exist where I live, but I dislike them on principle. I think city councils need to be banning them. Sidewalks aren't for wheeled vehicles in the first place, and they definitely aren't for corporations to fill with whatever they want. They're for people! Get this ewaste junk out of the already too small spaces between roads and parking lots that people are supposed to exist in!
I think sidewalks are adequate for wheeled vehicles. If anything it's more about speed and size than it is about how something moves. I don't think anyone has an issue with someone in a wheelchair...
I think sidewalks are adequate for wheeled vehicles. If anything it's more about speed and size than it is about how something moves. I don't think anyone has an issue with someone in a wheelchair (even motorized) using a sidewalk over imaginary bike lanes or such.
Now if sidewalks become oversaturated by wheeled vehicles that could be a real problem. I don't imagine that sidewalks were really envisioned to be heavily utilized commercially in most cases, so it would completely wreck the planning behind their usage and how they were actually designed and implemented.
I almost put in a sentence about how some wheeled vehicles are inevitable and fine, but it didn't really fit nicely anywhere in my 2am rant. I also would bucket wheelchairs as pedestrians rather...
I almost put in a sentence about how some wheeled vehicles are inevitable and fine, but it didn't really fit nicely anywhere in my 2am rant. I also would bucket wheelchairs as pedestrians rather than vehicles if I was cencusing sidewalk usage and my original usage was more in line with that. My real point was that sidewalks are for humans to move around at walking speed. This of course includes wheelchairs. If what was legally allowed on sidewalks was defined by what is allowed rather than what isn't then these robots probably never would've been allowed.
I'm not even upset at people that misuse them for bikes where there aren't better alternatives, but was calling out that that's not what sidewalks are for. Rather than this misuse being for people though it's just so businesses can have more money by externalizing their costs directly into the faces of pedestrians. This is this probably even hostile to the people in wheelchairs as they're going to be fighting with them for space on thin sidewalks. And when someone gets injured going around one of these things it'll be blamed on the person that wanted to use the sidewalk but had to do something unsafe due to it being blocked rather than blaming the thing that shouldn't be blocking it in the first place.
I dislike these because they aren't humans moving around. This is companies seeing yet another space that isn't for them and just taking it. People shouldn't be interacting with this garbage on sidewalks and should be no more welcome than any other box in the way of the path. Businesses get more money and actual humans get obstacles in the few spaces they have left. Wonderful.
If by some miracle their existence caused the sidewalk infrastructure to be made better then I guess some argument could be made for them, but they won't. Stuff like this never does. They just take, ruining what we did have. I have no interest in adding random moving corporate, probably billboarded, obstacles to places for humans to move around. Letting businesses just erode even more public space isn't worth the "value" of lower expense food delivery (if it even is a value to take money that could be earned in a local economy and export it to silicon valley via robot).
I knew what you meant by the sidewalk being for people. It's a valid perspective. I mentioned wheelchairs not as though you hadn't considered them but more to establish the basis that I don't...
I knew what you meant by the sidewalk being for people. It's a valid perspective. I mentioned wheelchairs not as though you hadn't considered them but more to establish the basis that I don't think something being on wheels is inherently a problem. When you distinguish between bicycles and wheelchairs, I think that illustrates there's something more to what justifies use on a sidewalk because they're both on wheels and they're both helping actual people move around on the sidewalk.
Now I realize it's a sidewalk, not a sideroll and people in wheelchairs may not be able to or can't necessarily walk so it's an obvious exception whereas those on bikes are either seen as doing it recreationally or they're voluntarily using it as a transport vehicle but it's oversized or moves too quickly to operate on a sidewalk with those who are walking. But it's not also like people can't slow down on bicycles to appropriate speeds when needed so I just innately don't find bicycles to be a problem on sidewalks, rather some of the operators of the bicycles to be the problem. I also get that it varies by location and density. Big cities where there's lots of pedestrians, someone on a bicycle can't slow down to appropriate speeds without complely nullifying the advantage of the bike as there would be no place where it's appropriate to go faster on a sidewalk.
Having said all that, I do agree commercial usage of sidewalks can be a big issue but I don't think it has anything to do with whether they're doing it on wheels or not. They could potentially be doing it with biped robots rather than ones with wheels and they're the same potential problem to me.
Also I think sidewalks like everything else have room for adaptation and growing with society and that might include different ways of utilizing them. What makes it any different than commercial services using roads? If you have a road that is congested with commercial traffic, the typical solution to this in many locations is not to get rid of commercial traffic but rather expand or redesign infrastructure to accommodate more traffic. I do recognize that sidewalks are sort of an endangered infrastructure so to speak, so it's necessary to defend them from extinction (not necessarily literally), and they represent something for society that doesn't involve requiring people to buy something just to get around to places and having that invaded by commercial usage can potentially threaten it, but it's also a public benefit to some extent so there should be some consideration for how to make it all coexist.
On adaptation: I don't believe it would happen in a positive direction. History goes the opposite direction. Streets didn't just come into existence as places for personal vehicles until...
On adaptation: I don't believe it would happen in a positive direction. History goes the opposite direction. Streets didn't just come into existence as places for personal vehicles until businesses came along and added. They were for humans before cars came along. When it became apparent that having humans and cars occupy the same spaces was bad cars won, evicting humans to literally only walk on the side and often even criminalizing humans using the street. So human use to mixed use to no humans. That's the pattern before and probably again. In my mind we need to kill the business incentives to do that before the businesses kill those spaces first because I'm not looking forward to being relegated to the side side walk by robots.
I don't have these in my city (I can't see them figuring out how to get these to ring the right doorbell in a German apartment building even if the robots never got vandalized), but I suspect they...
I don't have these in my city (I can't see them figuring out how to get these to ring the right doorbell in a German apartment building even if the robots never got vandalized), but I suspect they don't travel fast enough to not be a hindrance in a bike lane. If they do travel fast enough that they'd comfortably mingle with bike traffic in a bike lane, they definitely shouldn't be using pedestrian sidewalks.
I'd also be against that. They'd just switch from being a hindrance to pedestrians to a hindrance to bikers. I can't imagine anyone that uses bike lanes would want to deal with them and those that...
I'd also be against that. They'd just switch from being a hindrance to pedestrians to a hindrance to bikers. I can't imagine anyone that uses bike lanes would want to deal with them and those that aren't already using the bike lanes would see them as evidence of them sucking. For example, "why would I want to try bike in the robot lane?"
Even worse, they'd disrupt bike traffic. Bike lanes exist to provide a safe environment for unshielded humans on dangerous streets. Autonomous delivery vehicles can't die. Toss them into the street.
Even worse, they'd disrupt bike traffic.
Bike lanes exist to provide a safe environment for unshielded humans on dangerous streets.
Autonomous delivery vehicles can't die. Toss them into the street.
My problem is that taking over sidewalks, or even bike lanes, is taking over human spaces. The person in a wheelchair blocked by a robot trying to go the other direction is going to feel pretty...
My problem is that taking over sidewalks, or even bike lanes, is taking over human spaces. The person in a wheelchair blocked by a robot trying to go the other direction is going to feel pretty interfered with. Maybe a random single individual won't be too impacted, but groups, families, less maneuverable things like wheelchairs and strollers, and so on having to dodge this stuff in a human-centered space is bad. Just humans becoming the less important again after having already given up so much space to cars.
Coco Robotics, the maker of four-wheeled autonomous sidewalk rovers, has raised $80 million to help grow its fleet. Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI and an existing Coco investor, contributed to the fundraising round.
About 1,000 Coco bots are currently making deliveries in Los Angeles, Dallas, Miami and Helsinki. The company plans to expand into more markets and expects to have thousands of bots on the ground by the end of the year, which it says will give it the largest autonomous vehicle fleet in the world.
…
Coco’s bots are powered by electricity and use artificial intelligence to navigate cities, though they are monitored from afar by humans who can step in if needed. Each bot has a capacity of 90 liters, or about six extra-large pizzas, and a delivery radius of 1 to 2 miles. They have completed more than 500,000 deliveries to date.
The company integrates with DoorDash and Uber Eats, and restaurants can opt in to having Coco bots deliver orders placed through those apps. Orders come in like any other delivery order would. Employees then load the food into a robot and send it on its way. The customer unlocks their food using a code in their delivery app.
I have to say, I am amazed that they aren’t entirely vandalized into oblivion by crackheads. Not sure what that says about the neighbourhood I live in.
I have to say, I am amazed that they aren’t entirely vandalized into oblivion by crackheads. Not sure what that says about the neighbourhood I live in.
I've not personally encountered these as they don't exist where I live, but I dislike them on principle. I think city councils need to be banning them. Sidewalks aren't for wheeled vehicles in the first place, and they definitely aren't for corporations to fill with whatever they want. They're for people! Get this ewaste junk out of the already too small spaces between roads and parking lots that people are supposed to exist in!
I think sidewalks are adequate for wheeled vehicles. If anything it's more about speed and size than it is about how something moves. I don't think anyone has an issue with someone in a wheelchair (even motorized) using a sidewalk over imaginary bike lanes or such.
Now if sidewalks become oversaturated by wheeled vehicles that could be a real problem. I don't imagine that sidewalks were really envisioned to be heavily utilized commercially in most cases, so it would completely wreck the planning behind their usage and how they were actually designed and implemented.
I almost put in a sentence about how some wheeled vehicles are inevitable and fine, but it didn't really fit nicely anywhere in my 2am rant. I also would bucket wheelchairs as pedestrians rather than vehicles if I was cencusing sidewalk usage and my original usage was more in line with that. My real point was that sidewalks are for humans to move around at walking speed. This of course includes wheelchairs. If what was legally allowed on sidewalks was defined by what is allowed rather than what isn't then these robots probably never would've been allowed.
I'm not even upset at people that misuse them for bikes where there aren't better alternatives, but was calling out that that's not what sidewalks are for. Rather than this misuse being for people though it's just so businesses can have more money by externalizing their costs directly into the faces of pedestrians. This is this probably even hostile to the people in wheelchairs as they're going to be fighting with them for space on thin sidewalks. And when someone gets injured going around one of these things it'll be blamed on the person that wanted to use the sidewalk but had to do something unsafe due to it being blocked rather than blaming the thing that shouldn't be blocking it in the first place.
I dislike these because they aren't humans moving around. This is companies seeing yet another space that isn't for them and just taking it. People shouldn't be interacting with this garbage on sidewalks and should be no more welcome than any other box in the way of the path. Businesses get more money and actual humans get obstacles in the few spaces they have left. Wonderful.
If by some miracle their existence caused the sidewalk infrastructure to be made better then I guess some argument could be made for them, but they won't. Stuff like this never does. They just take, ruining what we did have. I have no interest in adding random moving corporate, probably billboarded, obstacles to places for humans to move around. Letting businesses just erode even more public space isn't worth the "value" of lower expense food delivery (if it even is a value to take money that could be earned in a local economy and export it to silicon valley via robot).
I knew what you meant by the sidewalk being for people. It's a valid perspective. I mentioned wheelchairs not as though you hadn't considered them but more to establish the basis that I don't think something being on wheels is inherently a problem. When you distinguish between bicycles and wheelchairs, I think that illustrates there's something more to what justifies use on a sidewalk because they're both on wheels and they're both helping actual people move around on the sidewalk.
Now I realize it's a sidewalk, not a sideroll and people in wheelchairs may not be able to or can't necessarily walk so it's an obvious exception whereas those on bikes are either seen as doing it recreationally or they're voluntarily using it as a transport vehicle but it's oversized or moves too quickly to operate on a sidewalk with those who are walking. But it's not also like people can't slow down on bicycles to appropriate speeds when needed so I just innately don't find bicycles to be a problem on sidewalks, rather some of the operators of the bicycles to be the problem. I also get that it varies by location and density. Big cities where there's lots of pedestrians, someone on a bicycle can't slow down to appropriate speeds without complely nullifying the advantage of the bike as there would be no place where it's appropriate to go faster on a sidewalk.
Having said all that, I do agree commercial usage of sidewalks can be a big issue but I don't think it has anything to do with whether they're doing it on wheels or not. They could potentially be doing it with biped robots rather than ones with wheels and they're the same potential problem to me.
Also I think sidewalks like everything else have room for adaptation and growing with society and that might include different ways of utilizing them. What makes it any different than commercial services using roads? If you have a road that is congested with commercial traffic, the typical solution to this in many locations is not to get rid of commercial traffic but rather expand or redesign infrastructure to accommodate more traffic. I do recognize that sidewalks are sort of an endangered infrastructure so to speak, so it's necessary to defend them from extinction (not necessarily literally), and they represent something for society that doesn't involve requiring people to buy something just to get around to places and having that invaded by commercial usage can potentially threaten it, but it's also a public benefit to some extent so there should be some consideration for how to make it all coexist.
On adaptation: I don't believe it would happen in a positive direction. History goes the opposite direction. Streets didn't just come into existence as places for personal vehicles until businesses came along and added. They were for humans before cars came along. When it became apparent that having humans and cars occupy the same spaces was bad cars won, evicting humans to literally only walk on the side and often even criminalizing humans using the street. So human use to mixed use to no humans. That's the pattern before and probably again. In my mind we need to kill the business incentives to do that before the businesses kill those spaces first because I'm not looking forward to being relegated to the side side walk by robots.
Let them use the dedicated bike lanes (oh wait, cities don’t really do those)
I don't have these in my city (I can't see them figuring out how to get these to ring the right doorbell in a German apartment building even if the robots never got vandalized), but I suspect they don't travel fast enough to not be a hindrance in a bike lane. If they do travel fast enough that they'd comfortably mingle with bike traffic in a bike lane, they definitely shouldn't be using pedestrian sidewalks.
I'd also be against that. They'd just switch from being a hindrance to pedestrians to a hindrance to bikers. I can't imagine anyone that uses bike lanes would want to deal with them and those that aren't already using the bike lanes would see them as evidence of them sucking. For example, "why would I want to try bike in the robot lane?"
Even worse, they'd disrupt bike traffic.
Bike lanes exist to provide a safe environment for unshielded humans on dangerous streets.
Autonomous delivery vehicles can't die. Toss them into the street.
My problem is that taking over sidewalks, or even bike lanes, is taking over human spaces. The person in a wheelchair blocked by a robot trying to go the other direction is going to feel pretty interfered with. Maybe a random single individual won't be too impacted, but groups, families, less maneuverable things like wheelchairs and strollers, and so on having to dodge this stuff in a human-centered space is bad. Just humans becoming the less important again after having already given up so much space to cars.
From the article:
…
I have to say, I am amazed that they aren’t entirely vandalized into oblivion by crackheads. Not sure what that says about the neighbourhood I live in.