4 ms·

This technology is probably the most valuable thing a company can invest in at the moment. Imagine all of the car trips around the world being turned into profi

This technology is probably the most valuable thing a company can invest in at the moment. Imagine all of the car trips around the world being turned into profitable trips for a company, and imagine this being to the benefit of consumers. Owning a car is expensive; these companies can likely undercut car ownership cost and still make a profit. The savings would come from insurance & fuel efficiencies. Some people will claim they'll never give up on car ownership, but that's just based on the current context. On the timespan of decades, people will be less attached to the idea of car ownership. Companies like Apple & Google are uniquely suited to this problem just by having lots of talented software engineers who know about artificial intelligence. The fact that it has nothing to do with their existing businesses doesn't matter too much; it might end up being a lot bigger than their existing businesses.

slededit 8y ago
People don't own cars because they are cheaper. They own them for flexibility - which is why SUVs outsell compacts 10:1 despite worse gas mileage and higher prices. Competing solely on cost is a losing battle and has been since GM overtook ford in the '30s by offering style over pure function. Cars are fashion, and convenience. Even if an uber was cheaper I wouldn't wait 5 minutes for one outside a store.
- jfoster 8y ago
  If you take an efficient autonomous ride share, you'd gain some conveniences: No need to get a license, no need to do car registration, no need to insure your vehicle, no need to pay attention whilst driving, no need to find parking, no need to refuel/charge, no need to have the car maintained, no such thing as owning a car that has broken down, no need to change a busted tyre, and the list goes on. You might need to wait a minute or two for the cheaper ride to arrive, though. Time will tell whether that's a bias based on our current context or a natural preference.
  - slededit 8y ago
    I get all those from the bus but people still don't take public transit. The wait is truly the killer - not cost.
    - jfoster 8y ago
      You're right that people don't own cars because they are cheaper. But they will, in time, give up on car ownership because autonomous vehicles will be cheaper and better on other dimensions, too. Buses aren't a dedicated, direct ride to anywhere you want to go, so despite being cheaper, they don't stand in for car ownership. Besides, with enough volume, an autonomous vehicle might pick you up faster from a store's exit faster than you can walk through a parking lot to your car.
      - slededit 8y ago
        I would definitely own my own personal autonomous vehicle. And I think the rest of America would as well. It's this vision of replacing ownership with autonomous taxi fleets that is not going to happen. They are limited by roads and physics so they'll never have a wait time competitive with a car in the parking lot - and that is the killer. I do see the allure on the economic side so I understand why this vision is being sold to VCs. But it's going to be just another feature the dealer tries to upsell you on.
        jfoster 8y ago
        When you exit a store, you can see other cars, right? Imagine if all of those were autonomous and able to pick you up.
        slededit 8y ago
        Then they wouldn't be any cheaper than a car owned by me. The whole premise is they'd be cheaper from high utilization. And if not cost what benefit does it have to take a taxi than my own self driving car? I can't leave my things in it. It won't have my radio stations set the way I want. And every trip I'm faced with the guilt of an explicit dollar value for the trip.

slededit 8y ago

People don't own cars because they are cheaper. They own them for flexibility - which is why SUVs outsell compacts 10:1 despite worse gas mileage and higher prices. Competing solely on cost is a losing battle and has been since GM overtook ford in the '30s by offering style over pure function. Cars are fashion, and convenience. Even if an uber was cheaper I wouldn't wait 5 minutes for one outside a store.

jfoster 8y ago
If you take an efficient autonomous ride share, you'd gain some conveniences: No need to get a license, no need to do car registration, no need to insure your vehicle, no need to pay attention whilst driving, no need to find parking, no need to refuel/charge, no need to have the car maintained, no such thing as owning a car that has broken down, no need to change a busted tyre, and the list goes on. You might need to wait a minute or two for the cheaper ride to arrive, though. Time will tell whether that's a bias based on our current context or a natural preference.
- slededit 8y ago
  I get all those from the bus but people still don't take public transit. The wait is truly the killer - not cost.
  - jfoster 8y ago
    You're right that people don't own cars because they are cheaper. But they will, in time, give up on car ownership because autonomous vehicles will be cheaper and better on other dimensions, too. Buses aren't a dedicated, direct ride to anywhere you want to go, so despite being cheaper, they don't stand in for car ownership. Besides, with enough volume, an autonomous vehicle might pick you up faster from a store's exit faster than you can walk through a parking lot to your car.
    - slededit 8y ago
      I would definitely own my own personal autonomous vehicle. And I think the rest of America would as well. It's this vision of replacing ownership with autonomous taxi fleets that is not going to happen. They are limited by roads and physics so they'll never have a wait time competitive with a car in the parking lot - and that is the killer. I do see the allure on the economic side so I understand why this vision is being sold to VCs. But it's going to be just another feature the dealer tries to upsell you on.
      - jfoster 8y ago
        When you exit a store, you can see other cars, right? Imagine if all of those were autonomous and able to pick you up.
        slededit 8y ago
        Then they wouldn't be any cheaper than a car owned by me. The whole premise is they'd be cheaper from high utilization. And if not cost what benefit does it have to take a taxi than my own self driving car? I can't leave my things in it. It won't have my radio stations set the way I want. And every trip I'm faced with the guilt of an explicit dollar value for the trip.