3 ms·
Uh no, the end game is autonomous logistics; getting someone or something from point A to point B. More automation is good, we're sorely lacking in automation.
by omouse 11y ago
Uh no, the end game is autonomous logistics; getting someone or something from point A to point B. More automation is good, we're sorely lacking in automation.
The real issue is distribution of profits. If the money gained stays at the top levels and doesn't move around much, you get stagnation and a poorer standard of living.
- adventured 11y agoIf a small group of people gets rich off of Uber's solution (eg via stock), while everyone else gets to benefit from the drastic improvement in the taxi or transport system - it's everyone else that is getting the extreme majority of the benefit, as with nearly all similar scenarios. Larry Page and Sergey Brin have given me an extraordinary benefit to my life. I've maybe given them a few dollars over the years. It's clear who got the most out of that trade. They got $30 billion total (much of which will no doubt go to charity), the world got how much in benefit from what their search engine can do and how well it can do it? The same will plausibly be true with Uber in concept.
- gress 11y agoYou make it sound as though Larry and Sergey personally created all the content on the internet that you consume.
- maxwelljoslyn 11y agoI think adventured was referring to the value created by Google search, in itself, being so good at what it does - and not to the actual contents of its results.
- gress 11y agoAnd I am suggesting that the value created is much lower than the value captured.