3 ms·

What would all these drivers do once self driving taxis become the norm? They would instantly go from severely underpaid to completely unemployed. Considering

What would all these drivers do once self driving taxis become the norm? They would instantly go from severely underpaid to completely unemployed. Considering that a market disrupter like Uber has affected them to this extent, do people honestly believe 100,000 new jobs would be available once automation takes their jobs?

iaw 9y ago
This is a larger problem than just livery drivers, automation threatens nearly every industry over the next 30 years. The vocations requiring less training will go first but eventually jobs that no one expected will become automated. This is a bigger societal problem than just livery drivers, what do we do when there is no work for people? What do we do when technology drives the market value of an individuals labor to zero? To be clear, I don't believe letting them kill themselves is a good answer.
- peacetreefrog 9y ago
  Just because we're not sure what the jobs of the future will be like doesn't mean there won't be any. In the 1800's, 90% of people worked in agriculture. Tell anyone back at the time that in the 21st century it'd be < 2% and they'd freak out just like you are now.
  - iaw 9y ago
    I think the increase in leverage provided through the industrial revolution will pale in the comparison of that provided in the upcoming age of automation. Just because historically there was job replacement with the innovation doesn't mean that we'll see that in the coming century. If we are unprepared it could threaten our society for decades.
martin1975 9y ago
Airplanes do in fact have the capability to complete a flight from point A to point B without a pilot. Yet, we still embed pilots in the cockpit. Cars might be simpler, but there's way too many gotchas while driving a computer cannot be programmed to handle that a human driver can intuit or defend against. A completely driver-less future might happen, but it won't be with the current infrastructure. IMHO, you'd need to isolate self-driving lanes from human driver lanes completely before it can become a reality, and slowly phase out driver-only cars with self-driving cars/lanes. Even at that rate, I'm still not certain it would work better than what we have now...
- gruez 9y ago
  planes are big enough that 1 or 2 pilots is a small component of the airfare. you would probably pay 1% or 2% more for a piloted plane, would you pay 40% more for a human driven taxi?
  - martin1975 9y ago
    good point. maybe an outright ban on small vehicles and mandate public, driver-less, mass transit for everyone in a city like NY. Everyone walk the last mile or two - we're all fat anyway.
- coolaliasbro 9y ago
  >...but it won't be with the current infrastructure... slowly phase out driver-only cars with self-driving cars/lanes. Upvoted! I've posted it before and I'll post it again: what advantages does driverless car-based transportation infrastructure offer over a rail system of the same scale? I am genuinely interested to hear counter arguments since, to my mind, well planned/maintained rail systems can better leverage centrally generated power, have better driver (conductor) : passenger ratios, are easier to maintain in aggregate (ie. tracks vs. roads, total number of train cars < total number of motor vehicles, etc.), and so forth. What am I missing?
  - lagadu 9y ago
    Infrastructure. You can reach a lot further using roads than you can using tracks. A system that would replace roads with tracks would be completely impractical and we'd end up with the same as the road system with all its problems.
  - zolthrowaway 9y ago
    The last mile problem [0]. A rail system could work for a very densely populated area, but there is way too much sprawl. It's part of the reason why cars are basically seen as a necessity in the US. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_mile_(transportation) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_mile_(transportation)

iaw 9y ago

This is a larger problem than just livery drivers, automation threatens nearly every industry over the next 30 years. The vocations requiring less training will go first but eventually jobs that no one expected will become automated. This is a bigger societal problem than just livery drivers, what do we do when there is no work for people? What do we do when technology drives the market value of an individuals labor to zero? To be clear, I don't believe letting them kill themselves is a good answer.

peacetreefrog 9y ago
Just because we're not sure what the jobs of the future will be like doesn't mean there won't be any. In the 1800's, 90% of people worked in agriculture. Tell anyone back at the time that in the 21st century it'd be < 2% and they'd freak out just like you are now.
- iaw 9y ago
  I think the increase in leverage provided through the industrial revolution will pale in the comparison of that provided in the upcoming age of automation. Just because historically there was job replacement with the innovation doesn't mean that we'll see that in the coming century. If we are unprepared it could threaten our society for decades.

martin1975 9y ago

Airplanes do in fact have the capability to complete a flight from point A to point B without a pilot. Yet, we still embed pilots in the cockpit. Cars might be simpler, but there's way too many gotchas while driving a computer cannot be programmed to handle that a human driver can intuit or defend against. A completely driver-less future might happen, but it won't be with the current infrastructure. IMHO, you'd need to isolate self-driving lanes from human driver lanes completely before it can become a reality, and slowly phase out driver-only cars with self-driving cars/lanes. Even at that rate, I'm still not certain it would work better than what we have now...

gruez 9y ago
planes are big enough that 1 or 2 pilots is a small component of the airfare. you would probably pay 1% or 2% more for a piloted plane, would you pay 40% more for a human driven taxi?
- martin1975 9y ago
  good point. maybe an outright ban on small vehicles and mandate public, driver-less, mass transit for everyone in a city like NY. Everyone walk the last mile or two - we're all fat anyway.
coolaliasbro 9y ago
>...but it won't be with the current infrastructure... slowly phase out driver-only cars with self-driving cars/lanes. Upvoted! I've posted it before and I'll post it again: what advantages does driverless car-based transportation infrastructure offer over a rail system of the same scale? I am genuinely interested to hear counter arguments since, to my mind, well planned/maintained rail systems can better leverage centrally generated power, have better driver (conductor) : passenger ratios, are easier to maintain in aggregate (ie. tracks vs. roads, total number of train cars < total number of motor vehicles, etc.), and so forth. What am I missing?
- lagadu 9y ago
  Infrastructure. You can reach a lot further using roads than you can using tracks. A system that would replace roads with tracks would be completely impractical and we'd end up with the same as the road system with all its problems.
- zolthrowaway 9y ago
  The last mile problem [0]. A rail system could work for a very densely populated area, but there is way too much sprawl. It's part of the reason why cars are basically seen as a necessity in the US. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_mile_(transportation) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_mile_(transportation)