6 ms·

> I think when it really works it will be more like the transition from feature phones to smart phones. very very quick. If they actually work it's just too com

> I think when it really works it will be more like the transition from feature phones to smart phones. very very quick. If they actually work it's just too compelling. The definition of "very very quick" is important here. The smart phone adoption took over a decade. to get to 80+%. [1] Cars are much more expensive than phones, and last longer. The average age for a car in the US is 11.5 years [2] and people replace their cars between 5 and 7 years. [3] And my guess is self-driving technology will be used at the top-end of the market, and slowly trickle down. This is similar to pretty much any consumer technology: the technology starts off as a premium and becomes a commodity over a longer period if time. So, if we use cell phones as a benchmark, it will take 10 years at a minimum. It likely will take 20 years given the duty cycle of vehicles. (Assuming we all still own a vehicle. If we all move to subscriptions, that might be a different story.) Fleets will be replaced sooner, because the commercial ROI will be compelling. But it still takes a ton of capital to replace a fleet, and they need to get the ROI out of their _existing_ fleet before they invest in new ones. So even that won't be immediate. But it might be uneven. I 100% agree with your example of sleeping through the night. If I can do that with a rental, and that's cheaper than flying, I might consider it. [1] https://www.comscore.com/Insights/Blog/US-Smartphone-Penetration-Surpassed-80-Percent-in-2016 https://www.comscore.com/Insights/Blog/US-Smartphone-Penetra... [2] https://www.carchex.com/research-center/auto-warranties/how-often-do-people-change-cars/ https://www.carchex.com/research-center/auto-warranties/how-... [3] https://www.quora.com/How-often-do-people-replace-their-cars https://www.quora.com/How-often-do-people-replace-their-cars

deegles 5y ago
Not if existing fleets can be retrofitted to be self driving. At $15/hr, if you can keep a car or truck driving 100 hours per week that's $6,000 month of labor costs saved. It's reasonable to expect insurance costs will be lower as well. Fuel economy would be better too, since a self driving car would be happy to drive at 60mph or less to get more MPG. Even if the system + retrofit costs $50,000 that's an ROI of ~8 months. These numbers are made up but even with the most pessimistic of assumptions I believe widespread adoption will happen much faster than 10 years.
- wiremine 5y ago
  Good point. That extends the ROI of the original investment, so it feels like a no brainer. The big assumption is the retrofit market. Is that something anyone is talking about? Is that something Waymo and the like will be offering? My point is: it makes sense, but is it the low hanging fruit someone will be going after right way? Or will this happen down the road?
  - gpt5 5y ago
    In a way, Waymo is already in that business - as all the cars they use are retrofitted.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - Retric 5y ago
      Waymo is solving this for a handful of specific models, they would need to do significant work to adapt their system to say a 2010 Corolla let alone more exotic stuff. It’s not just physical instillation their models would have to be adapted for different camera placement, vehicle weight, etc.
    - jfoster 5y ago
      But not to the point where they are selling kits. They retrofit a specific vehicle for use in their service. I think CommaAI is the closest to a kit, but it probably will never quite reach "no-human-required" autonomous driving; I don't think they're even aiming for that. https://github.com/commaai/openpilot/blob/master/docs/CARS.md https://github.com/commaai/openpilot/blob/master/docs/CARS.m...
- sokoloff 5y ago
  If the ROI was in 8 months, I’d think the seller of the tech would be charging too little. Why give it away for that price, when an ROI of 24 months would still be compelling, would give far greater margins and a more balanced split between the consumer and producer of the tech?
bredren 5y ago
Adoption of smartphones was also learning to adopt to a major technology change. Adoption was also spread unevenly. Some parts of the country moved past flip phones long before others. There are still holdouts! Cars will be an entirely different matter. People are trained to accept internet enabled devices and ridesharing already. Once insurance rates for manual navigation clear those of an autonomous fleet vehicle, people won’t want the oil can Henry’s experience anymore. You can already tell most people don’t want to drive anyway. They are looking at their smartphones as they idle down the street.
- woojoo666 5y ago
  The bureaucracy is probably the larger hurdle. Snartphones don't really risk lives the same way cars do. And there are still a lot of people wary of the safety and capability of self driving cars. It could be hard to convince a city to agree to having them, and convincing every city in the US may take a long while.
  - glenneroo 5y ago
    When they are proven to be considerably safer (a question of "when" and not "if" IMO), I highly doubt many politicians will want to stand in the way of allowing them on their streets... nevermind if Apple ever comes out with a car, it could quickly become a highly sought after experience.
    - woojoo666 5y ago
      I thought they have already been proven safer than human drivers. And yet people are still wary.
xbmcuser 5y ago
The replacement cycle for taxi ie commercial vehicles is lot shorter. Taxi fleets will move to self driving cars a lot faster. 2 biggest running costs for commercial vehicle are driver and fuel. So driver being replaced by ai and ice cars being replaced by electric happening almost at the same time means the transitions will be a lot faster.

deegles 5y ago

Not if existing fleets can be retrofitted to be self driving. At $15/hr, if you can keep a car or truck driving 100 hours per week that's $6,000 month of labor costs saved. It's reasonable to expect insurance costs will be lower as well. Fuel economy would be better too, since a self driving car would be happy to drive at 60mph or less to get more MPG. Even if the system + retrofit costs $50,000 that's an ROI of ~8 months. These numbers are made up but even with the most pessimistic of assumptions I believe widespread adoption will happen much faster than 10 years.

wiremine 5y ago
Good point. That extends the ROI of the original investment, so it feels like a no brainer. The big assumption is the retrofit market. Is that something anyone is talking about? Is that something Waymo and the like will be offering? My point is: it makes sense, but is it the low hanging fruit someone will be going after right way? Or will this happen down the road?
- gpt5 5y ago
  In a way, Waymo is already in that business - as all the cars they use are retrofitted.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - Retric 5y ago
    Waymo is solving this for a handful of specific models, they would need to do significant work to adapt their system to say a 2010 Corolla let alone more exotic stuff. It’s not just physical instillation their models would have to be adapted for different camera placement, vehicle weight, etc.
  - jfoster 5y ago
    But not to the point where they are selling kits. They retrofit a specific vehicle for use in their service. I think CommaAI is the closest to a kit, but it probably will never quite reach "no-human-required" autonomous driving; I don't think they're even aiming for that. https://github.com/commaai/openpilot/blob/master/docs/CARS.md https://github.com/commaai/openpilot/blob/master/docs/CARS.m...
sokoloff 5y ago
If the ROI was in 8 months, I’d think the seller of the tech would be charging too little. Why give it away for that price, when an ROI of 24 months would still be compelling, would give far greater margins and a more balanced split between the consumer and producer of the tech?

bredren 5y ago

Adoption of smartphones was also learning to adopt to a major technology change. Adoption was also spread unevenly. Some parts of the country moved past flip phones long before others. There are still holdouts! Cars will be an entirely different matter. People are trained to accept internet enabled devices and ridesharing already. Once insurance rates for manual navigation clear those of an autonomous fleet vehicle, people won’t want the oil can Henry’s experience anymore. You can already tell most people don’t want to drive anyway. They are looking at their smartphones as they idle down the street.

woojoo666 5y ago
The bureaucracy is probably the larger hurdle. Snartphones don't really risk lives the same way cars do. And there are still a lot of people wary of the safety and capability of self driving cars. It could be hard to convince a city to agree to having them, and convincing every city in the US may take a long while.
- glenneroo 5y ago
  When they are proven to be considerably safer (a question of "when" and not "if" IMO), I highly doubt many politicians will want to stand in the way of allowing them on their streets... nevermind if Apple ever comes out with a car, it could quickly become a highly sought after experience.
  - woojoo666 5y ago
    I thought they have already been proven safer than human drivers. And yet people are still wary.

xbmcuser 5y ago

The replacement cycle for taxi ie commercial vehicles is lot shorter. Taxi fleets will move to self driving cars a lot faster. 2 biggest running costs for commercial vehicle are driver and fuel. So driver being replaced by ai and ice cars being replaced by electric happening almost at the same time means the transitions will be a lot faster.