3 ms·
In short, no. I read this in literally every HN discussion of ride sharing, but there's literally no reason to think that ride sharing companies will have any
by CPLX 8y ago
In short, no.
I read this in literally every HN discussion of ride sharing, but there's literally no reason to think that ride sharing companies will have any special role to play with autonomous vehicles if they materialize (which seems extremely doubtful in the short or medium term) and there's even less evidence that it will be cheaper.
I still can't figure out why people don't realize that low income humans are cheap. An autonomous car, if such a thing is ever in the real world, will at least for a long time be a complicated technically advanced computerized machine.
Like here's a pretty straightforward machine that rents for $125 a day: https://www.adoramarentals.com/p-~nkd4skit/NIKON-D4S-KIT https://www.adoramarentals.com/p-~nkd4skit/NIKON-D4S-KIT
For reference that's about the same price as the cost of hiring a minimum wage employee for an entire work day.
Now tell me if the guts of a self-driving car are going to be cheaper or more expensive than a standard DSLR camera.
- Domenic_S 8y agoThere are a ton of factors that make your DSLR to Autonomous Car comparison flawed. The utilization rate of the camera is going to be far lower than the rate of the car. The camera may sit on a shelf for weeks before being rented for a single day, so the per-rental price must be relatively high. The market is small. Also, cameras are comparatively easy to break, and the technology goes out of date extremely quickly as compared to a car. I think the greatest fiscal advantage to autonomous car fleets is the likely high utilization rate.
- CPLX 8y ago> There are a ton of factors that make your DSLR to Autonomous Car comparison flawed. Indeed. The biggest one of course being that there’s no such thing as an autonomous car.
- vlovich123 8y agoSnarky but inaccurate reply. They do if you're a resident of Phoenix. Prices are equivalent to Uber but it's still too early to conclude what's behind those prices. Are they sustainable at scale? Is it just to avoid having the price floor drop out from them if they're viewed as purely a discount option? Is it to dissuade having too many users on the system all at once?
- CPLX 8y agoThe way you can tell if you're looking at a driverless car is to check and see if there's a driver in it.
- OscarCunningham 8y agoMaybe they'll lobby for higher minimum wages?
- erikpukinskis 8y ago> low income humans are cheap This is far too broad a statement to possibly be true. It really depends on the situation.
- vlovich123 8y agoYour analysis fails to account that the demand for that camera is smaller, more variable, bursty, provides temporary exclusive ownership, & has a market that will bear that cost (professional photographers, filmographers, etc). That's why it's so expensive. The majority of the fleet of self driving cars would be rented out for nearly 16 hours a day 7 days a week with a fairly reliable income stream across many many users. Additionally you get multipliers by picking up extra passengers (shared ownership) which is win-win (lower cost for individual rider, better margins and revenue for fleet owner). A Nikon 4DS is also almost the cost of a LIDAR sensor while the cost of the LIDAR sensors are dropping quickly & will probably continue to do so due to economies of scale; the cost of the 4DS has reminded at 6k even long after being discontinued. Additionally, the 4DS has direct user wear & tear handling meaning on average it will wear out faster (drops, throwing it in a camera bag, etc) than a LIDAR mounted to the car.
- goobynight 8y agoYou can rent rooms and regular cars for cheaper than that day rate on the camera. Not a proper comparison, in my opinion, even if I agree that the self driving car costs might not make sense initially.