3 ms·

This is a great write up but misses how gov't regulation could actually force a winner-takes-all distribution. States (like CA and NV) have already started to d

This is a great write up but misses how gov't regulation could actually force a winner-takes-all distribution. States (like CA and NV) have already started to draw up their own autonomous driving regulations and the DOT is planning to support this evolution with Federal standards. It's reasonable to assume that these standards will get more stringent over time as accidents, insurance, and compatibility become forced issues (likely though lawsuits). The companies that have the data and systems to meet these standards will be able to keep up but it'd be hard (read: impossible) for a new entrant to catch up after the initial players are further down the evolutionary curve.

JumpCrisscross 9y ago
> It's reasonable to assume that these standards will get more stringent over time as accidents, insurance, and compatibility become forced issues (likely though lawsuits). The companies that have the data and systems to meet these standards will be able to keep up There's a term for this twin to regulatory capture. In essence, the amount of regulation in an industry scales with the age and development of the industry. Difficulty of entrance scales scales with regulation. Combine this with any economies of scale and network effects present, and you have a state-subsidised incumbency bias.
Tiktaalik 9y ago
The government regulatory standards could be so tough that there would be no real quality differentiation between autonomous car vendors, as all vendors would have to meet the same incredibly high standards of safety. An outcome could well be that both Tesla and Google both meet the high government standards, but in doing so they've had to create such high performing autonomous systems that the consumer can't tell the difference. They both work equally perfectly because they have to be to be allowed on the road. If this is the case then the autonomous system becomes a non-factor in the purchase of a car. Either you're in the market for an autonomous car or you're not.

JumpCrisscross 9y ago

> It's reasonable to assume that these standards will get more stringent over time as accidents, insurance, and compatibility become forced issues (likely though lawsuits). The companies that have the data and systems to meet these standards will be able to keep up There's a term for this twin to regulatory capture. In essence, the amount of regulation in an industry scales with the age and development of the industry. Difficulty of entrance scales scales with regulation. Combine this with any economies of scale and network effects present, and you have a state-subsidised incumbency bias.

Tiktaalik 9y ago

The government regulatory standards could be so tough that there would be no real quality differentiation between autonomous car vendors, as all vendors would have to meet the same incredibly high standards of safety. An outcome could well be that both Tesla and Google both meet the high government standards, but in doing so they've had to create such high performing autonomous systems that the consumer can't tell the difference. They both work equally perfectly because they have to be to be allowed on the road. If this is the case then the autonomous system becomes a non-factor in the purchase of a car. Either you're in the market for an autonomous car or you're not.