4 ms·

Which tells me there's something fundamentally wrong with the automotive (for these specific examples, but there are others) industry. Edit: typo.

• NeutronBoy 10y ago
  Eh, other companies were heading towards the same goal in smaller increments (and more slowly). First it was cruise control, then emergency auto-braking, then assisted cruise control, then lane assist, then lane change assist, then object identification with cameras, etc... It's just that they didn't publicise their goal of 'the car will do all the driving'. It was the same logical endpoint though.
  • johnward 10y ago
    This is true but I think the development in the tech industry kind of kicked it into high gear. Of course I still don't see manufacturers effectively beta testing tech with real drivers like Tesla. Car companies don't like huge risk they like churning out features slowly and predictably.
• Ensorceled 10y ago
  The profit incentive isn't there. Cars as a Service will drastically reduce overall car sales so why would you expect a car company be at the vanguard of a movement that will gut their industry?
  • mavhc 10y ago
    Because then they have a chance of winning
  • Symmetry 10y ago
    Because the major car makers are in competition and being the dominant player in the new movement might be better than their existing position, let along standing by while another player leads the movement.
  • deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]