5 ms·

While most if not all "concept technology" has its roots in the "we can do it, even if we don't know why we should" school of thought, I imagine this will be va

While most if not all "concept technology" has its roots in the "we can do it, even if we don't know why we should" school of thought, I imagine this will be valuable for self driving cars. Imagine a car that can drop you off at work, drive itself to the closest robo-charger, and return to pick you up with a full charge, all without needing an attendant. Given the current limited range of EVs, tech like this will likely encourage behavioral change in EV owners, reducing one of the negatives of EVs (forgetting to charge/not having enough charge to make it to your destination/having to remember to plug in every night), and ultimately spurring wider adoption. Then again, sometimes you have to say "I wonder if we could..." before you fully understand why in order to advance technology.

sandworm101 11y ago
That's how we end up with inflatable bbqs. This really looks like a rich person's toy, of no practical use. Many people have talked over the years about self-driving cars dropping people off and heading home. That sounds great in terms of the number of parking spots, and might make sense in cities where parking costs more than rent, but I cannot see how doubling the number of trips can reduce traffic congestion. The far simpler solution would be to install simple (ie cheap) chargers at each parking spot.
- Goronmon 11y ago
  Many people have talked over the years about self-driving cars dropping people off and heading home. Have they? I've just seen references to cars finding nearby charging stations, not just driving themselves all the way home. Either way, I think the more likely prospect is that people stop outright owning cars at that point. Why invest in a complete vehicle when you can just pay for a service that has a car pick you up whenever you need a ride?
  - greggyb 11y ago
    For the same reason some people invest in a whole kitchen, despite the fact that they can pay for a service that has food show up in front of them whenever they're hungry. Some people like to own their own things. Some people like to do things themselves. There will always be locations where there is not enough population density to ensure wait times will be <5 minutes for a ride at all times. There's no reason to expect that self-driving cars will instantly dominate the market once we get to some sort of tipping point. Certainly they will allow for new paradigms in transportation, and they will shift "manual"[0] cars into a less dominant position in the market. Keep in mind that not everyone shares your preferences. [0] It is interesting that we already have manual and automatic cars. How will we readily distinguish these? Additionally, I'd imagine that there is a large venn diagram overlap between drivers who prefer stick shift and who will prefer to drive their own vehicle.
    - seanmcdirmid 11y ago
      Don't ignore developing markets. The USA has plenty of roads to waste, but Beijing and Bangalore don't. You'll see self driving cars be first mandated in cities with serious infrastructure problems as a way to completely optimize traffic (e.g. No manual cars on the express ways). Then local western governments will see a chance to cut their own budgets, as an easy way to satisfy the anti-tax attitudes of those people who ironically would prefer to drive their own cars.
      - greggyb 11y ago
        I think your post goes to support my point that there is great diversity in markets, and we can't expect a single individual's experience or preference to accurately represent such. > the anti-tax attitudes of those people who ironically would prefer to drive their own cars. I am curious as to why you think that there would be such a large crossover between those who would prefer to have a "manual" car, and those who have anti-tax attitudes?
        seanmcdirmid 11y ago
        Because self-driving cars are socialist to an extreme. The real benefit of them is not to free the human of the tedious task of driving, but to take the human out of the traffic system so it can be optimized for the greater good. The same could be said about taxes: they sacrifice individual wealth for the greater good. There will necessarily be a lot of resistance to self driving cars...people like driving! But they are quite inevitable, not necause people will "prefer" them but for totally societal economic reasons. And that is why your argument doesn't make sense to me, it's as if we will have any choice about it, when the current system is so messed up and under funded that it's obvious we won't.
        greggyb 11y ago
        There's no reason to expect "enjoys the experience of driving" and "is opposed to taxation" are descriptions of an individual that must be found exclusively together. That's the issue I take with your original statement. I also see no reason to expect that it is inevitable that self-driving cars become mandatory globally, but that is a different point entirely and not one I'm interested in pursuing right now.

sandworm101 11y ago

That's how we end up with inflatable bbqs. This really looks like a rich person's toy, of no practical use. Many people have talked over the years about self-driving cars dropping people off and heading home. That sounds great in terms of the number of parking spots, and might make sense in cities where parking costs more than rent, but I cannot see how doubling the number of trips can reduce traffic congestion. The far simpler solution would be to install simple (ie cheap) chargers at each parking spot.

Goronmon 11y ago
Many people have talked over the years about self-driving cars dropping people off and heading home. Have they? I've just seen references to cars finding nearby charging stations, not just driving themselves all the way home. Either way, I think the more likely prospect is that people stop outright owning cars at that point. Why invest in a complete vehicle when you can just pay for a service that has a car pick you up whenever you need a ride?
- greggyb 11y ago
  For the same reason some people invest in a whole kitchen, despite the fact that they can pay for a service that has food show up in front of them whenever they're hungry. Some people like to own their own things. Some people like to do things themselves. There will always be locations where there is not enough population density to ensure wait times will be <5 minutes for a ride at all times. There's no reason to expect that self-driving cars will instantly dominate the market once we get to some sort of tipping point. Certainly they will allow for new paradigms in transportation, and they will shift "manual"[0] cars into a less dominant position in the market. Keep in mind that not everyone shares your preferences. [0] It is interesting that we already have manual and automatic cars. How will we readily distinguish these? Additionally, I'd imagine that there is a large venn diagram overlap between drivers who prefer stick shift and who will prefer to drive their own vehicle.
  - seanmcdirmid 11y ago
    Don't ignore developing markets. The USA has plenty of roads to waste, but Beijing and Bangalore don't. You'll see self driving cars be first mandated in cities with serious infrastructure problems as a way to completely optimize traffic (e.g. No manual cars on the express ways). Then local western governments will see a chance to cut their own budgets, as an easy way to satisfy the anti-tax attitudes of those people who ironically would prefer to drive their own cars.
    - greggyb 11y ago
      I think your post goes to support my point that there is great diversity in markets, and we can't expect a single individual's experience or preference to accurately represent such. > the anti-tax attitudes of those people who ironically would prefer to drive their own cars. I am curious as to why you think that there would be such a large crossover between those who would prefer to have a "manual" car, and those who have anti-tax attitudes?
      - seanmcdirmid 11y ago
        Because self-driving cars are socialist to an extreme. The real benefit of them is not to free the human of the tedious task of driving, but to take the human out of the traffic system so it can be optimized for the greater good. The same could be said about taxes: they sacrifice individual wealth for the greater good. There will necessarily be a lot of resistance to self driving cars...people like driving! But they are quite inevitable, not necause people will "prefer" them but for totally societal economic reasons. And that is why your argument doesn't make sense to me, it's as if we will have any choice about it, when the current system is so messed up and under funded that it's obvious we won't.
        greggyb 11y ago
        There's no reason to expect "enjoys the experience of driving" and "is opposed to taxation" are descriptions of an individual that must be found exclusively together. That's the issue I take with your original statement. I also see no reason to expect that it is inevitable that self-driving cars become mandatory globally, but that is a different point entirely and not one I'm interested in pursuing right now.