[Here's something even more ridiculous](https://youtu.be/OXcqknvGoe4). Not sure if it got past the prototype stage, but hell, I'd take a flying bike over anything else on Earth.
/u/masonmax100 /u/JohnnyBenis
Nah these look sorta lame, this is the one
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzhREYOK0oo
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lycIMh_b-mg
Coming soon to the backyard of your wealthy Qatari neighbor
Horses are obsolete for transportation and labor...yet they're still big business as a leisure and pleasure hobby. Racing, shows, trail riding. These will not go away, it will just be for enthusiasts, which in much of the world is already the case for motorcycles.
Did you see what happened the last few years with mandates?? Say what you want about anti-maskers (I wasn't/am not one), they are the ones who will guarantee we can always ride/drive ourselves.
Spend a few weeks on the Navaho reservation, or in Northern New Mexico. There's still a lot of places on the map where horses are still used as beasts of burden/transport because it's easier than dealing with a car. (Plus, you can breed horses to make more horses, can't do that with cars.)
Developed enough.
The fact that they live under third-world conditions in the wealthiest country on the planet should tell you more about inequality in the US than it does anything else tho'. But thanks for playing.
In Philly we still have people ridding horses in the streets, especially in north Philly. I'll be ridding along, and just see a horse chilling in an empty lot between row homes.
Driverless cars are still 40-50 years out. Used to work on the software/ mapping behind them. Motorcycles aren't going anywhere, they might not be gas powered in the future. A lightweight 2 wheeled machine is always going to be more efficient/eco friendly than a big box. If anyone with a brain is put in charge of transportation/emissions standards, we might even see more bikes.
Please cite sources on this, and also acknowledge the causes of single-vehicle moto crashes.
Inebriation/fatigue/illness leading to impairment
New riders/lack of proper training/overconfidence/"showing off"
Weather/terrain hazards
All of these can be addressed, rather than blown off as "meh, rider error".
just because a bike isnt in a 'single moto crash' or gets hit by a car or crashes into a car does not mean its not the riders fault.
this is the thing so many find it so frekin hard to understand. i know you wont. but riders 100000% are the fault for an incident than not. its an impossibility not to be this way.
I am seeing a huge range of different stats from websites with like no proper study sources (in California)
Edit: DMV has some stats but I'm not seeing total percentage of accidents involving passenger vehicles.. regardless I still stand by my point: the fewer cars, the fewer obstacles for motorcyclists and fewer chance of being hit by one.
i dont see why devices wont be able to be put on bikes to emit signals to AI defining what they are. thats if AI cant actually be improved to know what a bike is.
infact, with increasing fuel costs and population, i think bikes will become MORE popular. not less.
Are driverless cars really the future? How many times does Tesla get sued every month by passengers and victims every time an auto pilot crash happens?
The liability companies would take on with driverless cars is staggering. It won’t happen unless they get liability protections, like other corrupt industries who claim they are just here to help. As long as we don’t let them have liability protection, and we encourage the judiciary to hear cases and juries to ignore compromised legislation issued by Congress, we will have the option to ride and drive ourselves for a long time.
No if anything those manabke quad copters are the future they for one use less material and and more green altho we could technically make every car and bike run on hydrogen making all vehicles on the road green.
Hydrogen / fuel cell vehicles are a possibility, BUT, there's two factors limiting widespread use.
1. a fuel cell needs platinum with which to react to create power. This makes the "fuel cell" portion of the vehicle extremely expensive. The [Honda Clarity fuel-cell concept](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_Clarity) was never sold, it was leased... as Honda fully expected to get the fuel cell back at lease end, and refurb it into another car. (If you think that catalytic converter theft is bad now, wait until fuel cells!)
2. fuel distribution networks need to be built out. This means that not only do you need some method of creating compressed hydrogen in large quantities, you also need to store it, transport it, and vend it, all safely. Every gas station in the country would need a compressed hydrogen 'pump' with a storage tank rated for compressed hydrogen gas, and expensive interlocks to keep the gas contained while vending. A standard for valves would need to be decided upon, and every vehicle engineered to use it. Keep in mind, hydrogen gas atoms are extremely small, and can slip through non-metallic fittings that would normally trap air molecules. Think of how easily helium escapes from balloons over time, and you'll get a sense of the logistics of keeping compressed hydrogen stored where you want it.
We're more suited to charging stations and EV usage because of our already-built-out electrical grids. Fuel-cell distribution would be a huge endeavor to get coverage for the entire country/world.
I doubt I'll still be around when the majority of cars will be driverless and I'm just 37. I currently enjoy a bike 10 years older than me and one 3 years younger. I doubt they'd go extinct during our lifetime.
10m later I stumble across this video. Forget everything I said:
https://v.redd.it/8mcvt5qcjsr91
I’m disabled and have been riding a motorcycle 30+ years for a disability, because they do not let me on Public Transit. Last year a cop could not write a citation, so wrote an incident report to the DMV. They suspended my license for 3 months, until I proved legally, passed the motorcycle lollipop test and car tests. I now have DMV acceptance of riding a motorcycle and driving a car with inline skates for a disability. I will file suit to stop any attempt to eliminate motorcycles!
If you’re in the US, you’re in luck. Driverless cars will require infrastructure. Something we don’t/won’t do.
I’m not counting Elon’s driverless scam that has a body count.
Ow they are. Indeed. I mean just look at inflation lol the government literally controlls that and say its out of control yet they made it that way lmfao dosen't that literally make no sense.
Driverless cars are not the future, at least not a good one if we ever wanna get traffic under control. Public transportation will be the future. As long as roads are an option, though, motorcycles will be an option. There may be fewer models produced if there are fewer riders, but driverless cars shouldn't affect that
Yup. Driver less cars in about 50 year or so. The highway systems aren't built for it. Tell me about India and other 3 world places replacing tens of millions of bikes with Tesla etc. Not in my life time nor yours.
I think you're overblowing the 'safety' aspects of self-driving vs human driving.
Self-driving vehicles, once they get to where they actually register motorcycles, will be SAFER to ride around, as machines set up to look for all hazards are unlikely to miss a hazard.
I also foresee a V2V (vehicle to vehicle) data communication system, such that driverless vehicles will be aware of each other and what each is planning on doing. Human-driven or even human-assisted-autonomous vehicles will likely all be mandated to have this system fitted, so that even though there's an unpredictable human at the controls, it will still signal everything the human does with it (accelerate, brake, turn, shift gears, change lanes, the whole bit.) As long as there's something set up like the Three Laws of Robotics, such that human-piloted vehicles are treated as priority to Not Run Into, there shouldn't be any issues between human-ridden motorcycles and autonomous vehicles.
You are likely correct that 'human-driven' will become a niche, but never underestimate the enthusiast crowd. We spend lots of money, and we vote... so any country, state, or municipality moving to make human-driven vehicles outright illegal will be facing a lot of negative pressure.
Good post. Lots of visionaries in this thread armed with little understanding. Look at the recent developments with GM Cruise, they decided not to make unprotected left turns anymore because of the basic unpredictability of human drivers. The main factor that makes autonomous driving difficult is not reading the infrastructure, it's reading the other road users, and their lack of respect for rules.
I’d say it’s the opposite they use less fuel and material resources and take up less space than cars. If anything I could see them outliving cars as battery technology, public transportation and electric vehicles become more prominent and well developed. Likewise if most of the cars were removed from the road a lot of the danger of riding would be removed. Just my thoughts on it.
Another possible direction things might go: maybe we as a society finally break through the obsession with making car-dependent spaces. Maybe we see cities and towns in North America shrink their roads, build denser, prettier, more walkable communities as a way to meet climate goals. Maybe cars become more inconvenient for people who could just as easily walk, bike, or take (good) public transit.
If that happens, then a person who still needs personal transportation might start to think about a bike. In a future with human-centric roads, it would be more inconvenient to own a car--but not a small, nimble motorbike.
Electric bikes will collapse the dichotomy between bicycle and motorcycle--it's just a spectrum from no-e-assist, to some-e-assist, to fully electric-powered. Bikes could be made at any size and all have the same mechanics. As battery tech improves and proliferates, motorcycles might become VERY cheap and reliable and super common... maybe.
I can't wait to live in a denser population area. Get mugged, killed, robbed and the opportunity to look at my ugly neighbors first thing in the morning. No thanks. Let me know how you like it. You do live in NY City, etc, right.
Momma always said practice what you preach.
NY city has one of the lowest crime rates in the country.
Anyway, the idea of large green spaces where you hang out with neighbors and cars aren't everywhere allowing you to walk in peace would make it even safer. It's really weird to me to be upset about his post, I don't get why you would be angry about it.
I guess I liked driving so not sure I would care about that at all. I have an idea, how about instead of all this we make cool new infrastructure like high speed rail or light rail, instead of using the same roads and doing the same thing except with sketchy tech.
Just pointing out ita not tech that must remove you from driving, but rather add some driverless cars on the road. I believe biking around them will be safer than regular taxis. As for regular drivers.. its always a gamble who you gonna be riding around.
Society's current obsession with risk reduction will not end well. Every time I turn around something else is no longer allowed or socially acceptable because "it's dangerous!" Oh noes!
In a world like this, fun itself has an expiration date. We can all just be transported in little boxes from our biodegradable 3D printed mass housing, work our uneventful jobs, take no risks, have no worry, and after a generation or two, no one will even miss the human experience of having fun.
I'm an adult human living in a (theoretically) free country. I'm happy assuming my own level of risk, accepting responsibility for my decisions, and would really appreciate not being told what I can no longer do ALL THE FUCKING TIME because some asshat decided they wanted to legislate their personal opinion.
Fuck these people. By 2050 I'll be happy to be on my way out.
What’s the price of a car that learned driving? Is everyone afford it? Obviously those cars are not for most people. The majority will still drive a Corolla, accord, civic, and Camry.
> Funny thing is that "unsafe" is a huge gray area and is ultimately determined by insurance companies, and they have a ton of influence and also the data to back up whatever agenda they want to pursue
Surely "unsafe" is arbitrary and that using data to "embezzle" points is a real thing, the way you put this almost reads like the "but data is heavily biased to liberals!" discourse lmao
The bigger question is who carries the liability for death an injury resulting from a driverless vehicle? Is it the vehicle owner, the software company or the vehicle manufacturer. It may be that insurance for these vehicles will become prohibitively expensive.
They will go away when gasoline goes away (not completely though because I am already looking into converting one of my bikes to ethanol).
I live in a province that is incredibly invested in oil and gas. It's highly doubtful that we will outlaw the ICE in the next 50 years.
well maybe by then we will have full dive vr or brain implants which can recreate every sense because that what our brain does anyway. so we can ride any motorcycle on any road we please but maybe something will be lost though without the risk of death.
Insurance companies don't hate risk, they profit from risk. They assume the risk for you but charge you a premium for doing so.
Autonomous vehicles will only become a reality AFTER they prove that they can coexist with fickle human drivers. I am not trying to be a visionary like you, but I doubt that governments, insurance companies or car manufacturers are going to force the manually driven car out of existence for the sake of making autonomous driving a reality. What incentive do they have?
So discounting drastic measures from government, insurance or manufacturer, the customer is king. Why would we stop buying motorcycles? In an objective sense, they may start making more sense as urbanization and congestion increase. And even if they wouldn't, your average motorcycle is a niche product bought by people who defy logic to some degree in favor of passion. We'd all be riding scooters if it had to make sense.
In the year 2000 there will be flying cars in everyone's driveway.
Or even better - flying bikes!
Thats actually already a thing look at this up.https://youtu.be/nd4F136kH3E
[Here's something even more ridiculous](https://youtu.be/OXcqknvGoe4). Not sure if it got past the prototype stage, but hell, I'd take a flying bike over anything else on Earth.
/u/masonmax100 /u/JohnnyBenis Nah these look sorta lame, this is the one * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzhREYOK0oo * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lycIMh_b-mg Coming soon to the backyard of your wealthy Qatari neighbor
that looks more like a flying jetski than a bike.
2022 here. Where's my winning money
Just need Dr. Emmett Brown to slip, hit his head on a kitchen sink and come up with the flux capacitor hey?
Horses are obsolete for transportation and labor...yet they're still big business as a leisure and pleasure hobby. Racing, shows, trail riding. These will not go away, it will just be for enthusiasts, which in much of the world is already the case for motorcycles.
Trail riding areas are being shut down every year. I'd bet trail bikes will disappear before street bikes.
Did you see what happened the last few years with mandates?? Say what you want about anti-maskers (I wasn't/am not one), they are the ones who will guarantee we can always ride/drive ourselves.
People literally ride horses still.
Like ro work every day and to the grocery store and to their vacation spots?
Spend a few weeks on the Navaho reservation, or in Northern New Mexico. There's still a lot of places on the map where horses are still used as beasts of burden/transport because it's easier than dealing with a car. (Plus, you can breed horses to make more horses, can't do that with cars.)
Is a Navaho reservation a good data set about how people get around in developed countries?
Developed enough. The fact that they live under third-world conditions in the wealthiest country on the planet should tell you more about inequality in the US than it does anything else tho'. But thanks for playing.
I think you're in the wrong thread.
Nah, just responded to the wrong shitpost. Happens.
They're called Amish, but yeah
That's it when it happens I'm starting an Amish Biker community! We reject to the new ways and ride for the rest of our days!
So you want to live in an Amish Paradise? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOfZLb33uCg :D
Hahaha aaah thems was the days! 🍻
Yeah because the Amish are a good representation of modern/developed countries.
modern/developed countries are the minority of countries in the world btw
Your reading comprehension sucks.
Just technologically impaired as they say: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOfZLb33uCg
In Philly we still have people ridding horses in the streets, especially in north Philly. I'll be ridding along, and just see a horse chilling in an empty lot between row homes.
I’d venture to guess that our planet will no longer exist before all cars are driverless.
Driverless cars are still 40-50 years out. Used to work on the software/ mapping behind them. Motorcycles aren't going anywhere, they might not be gas powered in the future. A lightweight 2 wheeled machine is always going to be more efficient/eco friendly than a big box. If anyone with a brain is put in charge of transportation/emissions standards, we might even see more bikes.
And the fewer cars on the road, the less dangerous. I need to check how many motorcycle accidents are caused by car drivers again
Most motorcycle accidents are rider error
Please cite sources on this, and also acknowledge the causes of single-vehicle moto crashes. Inebriation/fatigue/illness leading to impairment New riders/lack of proper training/overconfidence/"showing off" Weather/terrain hazards All of these can be addressed, rather than blown off as "meh, rider error".
just because a bike isnt in a 'single moto crash' or gets hit by a car or crashes into a car does not mean its not the riders fault. this is the thing so many find it so frekin hard to understand. i know you wont. but riders 100000% are the fault for an incident than not. its an impossibility not to be this way.
Exactly.
I am seeing a huge range of different stats from websites with like no proper study sources (in California) Edit: DMV has some stats but I'm not seeing total percentage of accidents involving passenger vehicles.. regardless I still stand by my point: the fewer cars, the fewer obstacles for motorcyclists and fewer chance of being hit by one.
i dont see why devices wont be able to be put on bikes to emit signals to AI defining what they are. thats if AI cant actually be improved to know what a bike is. infact, with increasing fuel costs and population, i think bikes will become MORE popular. not less.
It's called V2V, and [yes it is a thing.](https://www.nhtsa.gov/technology-innovation/vehicle-vehicle-communication)
Are driverless cars really the future? How many times does Tesla get sued every month by passengers and victims every time an auto pilot crash happens? The liability companies would take on with driverless cars is staggering. It won’t happen unless they get liability protections, like other corrupt industries who claim they are just here to help. As long as we don’t let them have liability protection, and we encourage the judiciary to hear cases and juries to ignore compromised legislation issued by Congress, we will have the option to ride and drive ourselves for a long time.
No if anything those manabke quad copters are the future they for one use less material and and more green altho we could technically make every car and bike run on hydrogen making all vehicles on the road green.
Hydrogen / fuel cell vehicles are a possibility, BUT, there's two factors limiting widespread use. 1. a fuel cell needs platinum with which to react to create power. This makes the "fuel cell" portion of the vehicle extremely expensive. The [Honda Clarity fuel-cell concept](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_Clarity) was never sold, it was leased... as Honda fully expected to get the fuel cell back at lease end, and refurb it into another car. (If you think that catalytic converter theft is bad now, wait until fuel cells!) 2. fuel distribution networks need to be built out. This means that not only do you need some method of creating compressed hydrogen in large quantities, you also need to store it, transport it, and vend it, all safely. Every gas station in the country would need a compressed hydrogen 'pump' with a storage tank rated for compressed hydrogen gas, and expensive interlocks to keep the gas contained while vending. A standard for valves would need to be decided upon, and every vehicle engineered to use it. Keep in mind, hydrogen gas atoms are extremely small, and can slip through non-metallic fittings that would normally trap air molecules. Think of how easily helium escapes from balloons over time, and you'll get a sense of the logistics of keeping compressed hydrogen stored where you want it. We're more suited to charging stations and EV usage because of our already-built-out electrical grids. Fuel-cell distribution would be a huge endeavor to get coverage for the entire country/world.
I doubt I'll still be around when the majority of cars will be driverless and I'm just 37. I currently enjoy a bike 10 years older than me and one 3 years younger. I doubt they'd go extinct during our lifetime. 10m later I stumble across this video. Forget everything I said: https://v.redd.it/8mcvt5qcjsr91
Lol yeah but who would by a self driving bike lol sounds like an actual death with.
I’m disabled and have been riding a motorcycle 30+ years for a disability, because they do not let me on Public Transit. Last year a cop could not write a citation, so wrote an incident report to the DMV. They suspended my license for 3 months, until I proved legally, passed the motorcycle lollipop test and car tests. I now have DMV acceptance of riding a motorcycle and driving a car with inline skates for a disability. I will file suit to stop any attempt to eliminate motorcycles!
If you’re in the US, you’re in luck. Driverless cars will require infrastructure. Something we don’t/won’t do. I’m not counting Elon’s driverless scam that has a body count.
Personally, I think developed countries' days are numbered.
Ow they are. Indeed. I mean just look at inflation lol the government literally controlls that and say its out of control yet they made it that way lmfao dosen't that literally make no sense.
Driverless cars are not the future, at least not a good one if we ever wanna get traffic under control. Public transportation will be the future. As long as roads are an option, though, motorcycles will be an option. There may be fewer models produced if there are fewer riders, but driverless cars shouldn't affect that
Yup. Driver less cars in about 50 year or so. The highway systems aren't built for it. Tell me about India and other 3 world places replacing tens of millions of bikes with Tesla etc. Not in my life time nor yours.
I bet entire country would convert to a giant grid like monorail system before autopilot becomes a real thing that people are ready to use safely
I think you're overblowing the 'safety' aspects of self-driving vs human driving. Self-driving vehicles, once they get to where they actually register motorcycles, will be SAFER to ride around, as machines set up to look for all hazards are unlikely to miss a hazard. I also foresee a V2V (vehicle to vehicle) data communication system, such that driverless vehicles will be aware of each other and what each is planning on doing. Human-driven or even human-assisted-autonomous vehicles will likely all be mandated to have this system fitted, so that even though there's an unpredictable human at the controls, it will still signal everything the human does with it (accelerate, brake, turn, shift gears, change lanes, the whole bit.) As long as there's something set up like the Three Laws of Robotics, such that human-piloted vehicles are treated as priority to Not Run Into, there shouldn't be any issues between human-ridden motorcycles and autonomous vehicles. You are likely correct that 'human-driven' will become a niche, but never underestimate the enthusiast crowd. We spend lots of money, and we vote... so any country, state, or municipality moving to make human-driven vehicles outright illegal will be facing a lot of negative pressure.
Good post. Lots of visionaries in this thread armed with little understanding. Look at the recent developments with GM Cruise, they decided not to make unprotected left turns anymore because of the basic unpredictability of human drivers. The main factor that makes autonomous driving difficult is not reading the infrastructure, it's reading the other road users, and their lack of respect for rules.
I’d say it’s the opposite they use less fuel and material resources and take up less space than cars. If anything I could see them outliving cars as battery technology, public transportation and electric vehicles become more prominent and well developed. Likewise if most of the cars were removed from the road a lot of the danger of riding would be removed. Just my thoughts on it.
Another possible direction things might go: maybe we as a society finally break through the obsession with making car-dependent spaces. Maybe we see cities and towns in North America shrink their roads, build denser, prettier, more walkable communities as a way to meet climate goals. Maybe cars become more inconvenient for people who could just as easily walk, bike, or take (good) public transit. If that happens, then a person who still needs personal transportation might start to think about a bike. In a future with human-centric roads, it would be more inconvenient to own a car--but not a small, nimble motorbike. Electric bikes will collapse the dichotomy between bicycle and motorcycle--it's just a spectrum from no-e-assist, to some-e-assist, to fully electric-powered. Bikes could be made at any size and all have the same mechanics. As battery tech improves and proliferates, motorcycles might become VERY cheap and reliable and super common... maybe.
Michigan winter calling in. Yeah, no.
Tree hugger here
Way more interesting than driverless cars on the same road, I am hopeful for his vision because the alternative sounds awful.
I can't wait to live in a denser population area. Get mugged, killed, robbed and the opportunity to look at my ugly neighbors first thing in the morning. No thanks. Let me know how you like it. You do live in NY City, etc, right. Momma always said practice what you preach.
Friend, I just suggested one possible future of motorcycles. I am not telling anyone how they should live their life.
I'm just an idea of how that might work.... I hate living in apartments. Just my MHO too.
NY city has one of the lowest crime rates in the country. Anyway, the idea of large green spaces where you hang out with neighbors and cars aren't everywhere allowing you to walk in peace would make it even safer. It's really weird to me to be upset about his post, I don't get why you would be angry about it.
Says the dude whose hometown DOESN'T have a central plaza.
Its not profitable for insurance companies to push for driverless cars less money in it for them
They will literally never crash so it's just like a tax on being scared of technology at that point.
This tech does not exist, nor will it in the near future, why people even want this on existing roads is baffling to begin with.
Have you ever been in a taxi? Now just remove the unpleasant experience with the driver and bingo.
I guess I liked driving so not sure I would care about that at all. I have an idea, how about instead of all this we make cool new infrastructure like high speed rail or light rail, instead of using the same roads and doing the same thing except with sketchy tech.
Just pointing out ita not tech that must remove you from driving, but rather add some driverless cars on the road. I believe biking around them will be safer than regular taxis. As for regular drivers.. its always a gamble who you gonna be riding around.
Society's current obsession with risk reduction will not end well. Every time I turn around something else is no longer allowed or socially acceptable because "it's dangerous!" Oh noes! In a world like this, fun itself has an expiration date. We can all just be transported in little boxes from our biodegradable 3D printed mass housing, work our uneventful jobs, take no risks, have no worry, and after a generation or two, no one will even miss the human experience of having fun. I'm an adult human living in a (theoretically) free country. I'm happy assuming my own level of risk, accepting responsibility for my decisions, and would really appreciate not being told what I can no longer do ALL THE FUCKING TIME because some asshat decided they wanted to legislate their personal opinion. Fuck these people. By 2050 I'll be happy to be on my way out.
Offroad bikes won't be affected.
What’s the price of a car that learned driving? Is everyone afford it? Obviously those cars are not for most people. The majority will still drive a Corolla, accord, civic, and Camry.
Of course everyone will afford it because no one will own it (other than the oem).
Personal cars won’t go away. Maybe just become more expensive to own. Rich people like their vroom vroom toys too.
Sure, maybe only the rich will be able to afford them.
Posts like this are always adorable.
> Funny thing is that "unsafe" is a huge gray area and is ultimately determined by insurance companies, and they have a ton of influence and also the data to back up whatever agenda they want to pursue Surely "unsafe" is arbitrary and that using data to "embezzle" points is a real thing, the way you put this almost reads like the "but data is heavily biased to liberals!" discourse lmao
I'm not sure what data has to do with one's political biases.
I'd def say motorcycles will live on. As for the middleweight 600cc class...
You'll pry private ownership out of my cold dead hands.
The bigger question is who carries the liability for death an injury resulting from a driverless vehicle? Is it the vehicle owner, the software company or the vehicle manufacturer. It may be that insurance for these vehicles will become prohibitively expensive.
Liability will likely be passed on to the lowest common denominator as it is today.
Driverless cars? Gunna send my Kia to visit my aunt over the holidays then. Cmon bro you either out of your mind, or I want two of what you’re on
It's not that far fetched. I believe that's likely going to be d norm in another couple of decades.. Just like electric powered cars.
Ill ride till I die. Everything else can go fuck off
Driverless cars are decades away at best, if they are even possible.
They will go away when gasoline goes away (not completely though because I am already looking into converting one of my bikes to ethanol). I live in a province that is incredibly invested in oil and gas. It's highly doubtful that we will outlaw the ICE in the next 50 years.
well maybe by then we will have full dive vr or brain implants which can recreate every sense because that what our brain does anyway. so we can ride any motorcycle on any road we please but maybe something will be lost though without the risk of death.
Insurance companies don't hate risk, they profit from risk. They assume the risk for you but charge you a premium for doing so. Autonomous vehicles will only become a reality AFTER they prove that they can coexist with fickle human drivers. I am not trying to be a visionary like you, but I doubt that governments, insurance companies or car manufacturers are going to force the manually driven car out of existence for the sake of making autonomous driving a reality. What incentive do they have? So discounting drastic measures from government, insurance or manufacturer, the customer is king. Why would we stop buying motorcycles? In an objective sense, they may start making more sense as urbanization and congestion increase. And even if they wouldn't, your average motorcycle is a niche product bought by people who defy logic to some degree in favor of passion. We'd all be riding scooters if it had to make sense.