Automation doesn’t break the law. How is this any different than running down to your car and moving it 50 feet. If the city want to apply a policy that prevents re-parking, then they should apply that to the law and enforcement. Otherwise, piss off.
Remote control cars are not generally legal on city streets.
3 Likes
i doubt such a system would be as anonymous as owning a beater civic
Yes, I agree completely!
1 Like
This practice already violates both the spirit of the law (which is intended to make more spots available for short-term parking in this area) and the letter of the law (you can’t legally let your unoccupied self-driving car drive on public streets).
3 Likes
Or when he tries to summon it with a boot attached to the rear wheel.
2 Likes
Stranger and stranger. It seems like quite a few commentators are quite upset about this guy moving his car using technology. First, let’s be clear that this is not using self driving technology. This is the car being moved by the vehicle owner using remote control technology. The car is not driving on the streets and it is not an autonomous vehicle so that argument seems a bit of a stretch. Second, the idea that free parking is some concession seems to miss the entire point of parking. Parking allows people who don’t live close to their place of employment the ability to commute to work. It is as necessary to vehicle use as oxygen is to you and I. Cities require parking but in some places the city has decided to tax workers who must commute to work by charging for it, creating hoops the worker must jump through in order to not pay additional taxes and in general making it more difficult for people to live.
In the end I feel like we are talking about the use of public lands. We are not charged for sitting on a public bench. Nor are we charged for using the sidewalk. Our taxes built those sidewalks and installed those benches. Yet, when it comes to the side of the road, out lawmakers have decided that it’s OK to make people pay to use them even though it was the people who paid for those roads and parking spaces in the first place. We should not be taxed for going to work and businesses should not be punished for providing the number of parking spaces the city requires it provide and no more. If you think businesses are getting away with something here, you are likely unaware that parking spots cots businesses more to create than it adds in value to the property meaning businesses who provide parking spots as mandated by the city are in fact loosing money every time they do it.
1 Like
If one believes that using twice the resources to commute every day is decent.
2 Likes
And an excellent platform for graffiti
2 Likes
Yeah, that part didn’t make any sense to me. I think this is a funny tweet, but I doubt he is actually avoiding any fines by doing this. How does the meter maid know he has moved one space?
In my city the tend to chalk the wheels. I’m sure other places are more sophisticated, but in any case I don’t think it’s ever exact to the space.
1 Like
Are you sure? Why did nevada have to pass a law to make driverless cars legal if driverless cars are legal?
1 Like
- private napping pod
- semi-affordable, comfortable extra room (NYC perspective…40 square feet is no joke!)
- emergency coital nest
- private fast-food dining area
- wealth projector
- political billboard / stickerbook / Coal-smoke machine
- portable smokers’ lounge…
(Not a car owner myself, but after puzzling about why so many NYers are, I’ve done some casual ethnography…)
2 Likes
For sure, chalking tires is the most expedient way to track parked cars, but a good parking enforcer would take notice if the same car is parked in the same zone day after day. They have cameras, so it’s just a matter of documenting the violation and giving the ticket. They know that people do this all the time and only the really aggressive ones will actually pursue the letter of the law (speaking as someone who has lived in parking hellzones and suffered the consequences).
1 Like
So he can remotely roll is car into an adjacent parking space. Big whoop. What if the only open spot was down the block or on the other side of the street?
The only problem with this theory is that it would involve doubling the trips that each car makes into and out of the urban centers - for every trip that a person makes to those commercial centers, the car makes two, since it’s going in to drop the person off, then out to park somewhere, then back in to pick the person up.
So, unless we also double road capacity in and out of all urban centers (not happening in most places), you’ll have double the congestion, double the emissions, double the potential accidents, etc., etc. This quickly becomes unworkable in most cities, and amounts to a massive waste of energy and public road space.
1 Like
Well, that escalated quickly.
Sure, sure…but can you automate this?
NEW YORK (AP) — Alec Baldwin has been arrested for allegedly punching someone during a dispute over a New York City parking spot.
— Zeke Miller (@ZekeJMiller) November 2, 2018
I’m hoping that parking will still be located near most locations, just not as obvious or visible as it is now.
If you start changing the requirements of a parking lot to remove the humans from the loop, you can probably get a lot more cars per acre. Presuming self-driving, networked cars, you wouldn’t need to have human access into the garage for normal operation. This means no walk ways, no elevators, and less space between cars (since they won’t open their doors). Since the cars are networked, you could double or triple park and the cars blocking the way would just move out of the way to unstack the garage. (Your car could anticipate how long you are going to be at your location and communicate this to the garage, which would assign it a spot based on this.) At the speeds in the garage, the car would also be perfectly “happy” operating “backwards”, so less roads for that too. Spirals wouldn’t need to be one-way; the garage could just dispatch cars up and down knowing where every car moving in the garage is at for every moment.
We may even eventually have systems like Chicago’s; where there is a public street mostly designed for people on the top level, and levels beneath for the automated cars, parking, and such.
My hope is that cars that are not being used will basically just “disappear”, and that the main street level will become more optimized for humans.
My fear is that you’re right. 
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
